the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
Idk bud, you're the one coming to our instance to complain about us making fun of your moderation policies. The very behavior of someone who is definitely not bothered.
To be honest I don't think anybody here (or you) is actually mad. You can do the whole 'Oh you should have cry-laugh emojis!' but you're just posting a hypothetical onto their posting style which doesn't exist. Some real scumbag reddit shit. Address what is actually being posted, don't pursue hypotheticals.
I don't think you get what is funny about it to us. If it was moderated for "Not relevant to the community" there would be zero gas. It was moderated for 'tankieism'. Since when was mild non-sectarian anti-capitalist sentiment 'tankie'? Your moderation team has clearly diluted the word to be completely meaningless and useless as a description of belief. Just say it's not relevant to the community! Don't betray your stupidity! It's not rocket science!
user report: Abusing Disengage rule
A call do disengage must be the only thing in the post. You don't get to respond to people and then call to disengage, this is completely disingenuous.
I think it's about time we defed from your garbage instance, and I'm glad to make sure you won't be showing you're entire ass around here again.
There you go again, proposing a hypothetical as if it is real. Again you don't understand what words actually mean. How is this 'rage-bait'? Who is profiting off of the advertising that makes something 'rage-bait'? It was a dumb moderation wording decision that we are collectively making fun of because we have a shared understanding of the meaning of a term. This isn't complicated.
Holy shit, dude you're just like every other tough-face poster, "I don't care, but I took time out of my day to call your posting habits unhealthy." Bro, of course you care, stop fronting! If you didn't care you wouldn't engage at all!
And you are following a post to an unrelated community to defend your moderation policies as if our opinions matter in the slightest to what is going on in your community. Why do you care what we think?
You really don't get how this works, do you? You don't get to insult people and then say 'Disengage'. That's not good forum behavior, that is disingenuous horseshit.
Stop using words you don't understand. It is not 'projecting' to point out you doing bad-faith posting. The forum rules are that if you want me to disengage all you have to do is post under me 'Disengage'. That is it. If you include any other bullshit, especially insults, that is not considered acceptable, you are just abusing the rules of disengagement to get the last word it. This has been the rule on most forum posting for fucking forever.
'Rage-bait' is specifically a term used to describe posting that is meant to drive engagement for advertising models. I have a buddy who specifically makes rage bait around NFL content. It specifically describes that behavior. It is not 'getting mad or making fun of shit online', because that is literally just the Internet, especially forum posting since it's inception. Back in the day, we would catchall of that with 'trolling'.
Why should I care if you want to stop my 'toxic habits'? How does you wanting to stop those habits have any relevance on the conversation? Listen to yourself, you are talking as if you have any power to stop me even if you did care. Your care, in that regard, is completely irrelevant. A weird power-trip.
Being autistic is not a reason. It's deferring your reasoning onto your neuro-divergency. We aren't slandering you. Someone calling that person a tankie for some dumb shit happened! And even if we did slander you, what would you coming along to 'correct the record' do, especially if you come in with the assumption that we are all 'toxic posters who circle jerk at rage-bait'? How is coming along in bad-faith helpful to you having a reasonable discussion with us?
You literally came in calling it a '2-minute hate', am I really supposed to believe that you were just coming in to 'correct the record'?
I know it's unfortunate to your whole thing, but words have meaning and diluting them to whatever your rhetorical preference is at any given moment is literally what we are making fun of on this post.
I haven't seen a level of denial like this in a long time. Implying you don't care in general, then altering specifically saying that you don't care about changing my toxic posting, then getting confused when I say that is a weird power-trip if you did care about changing my toxic posting is an interesting strategy. We'll see if it works for you.
Wow, I didn't want to accuse you of using autism as a shield from criticism, but damn, stop using your autism as a shield from criticism. I think you should really dig into why you feel this need for control over a narrative that doesn't actually matter, especially if we are all just projecting bad-faith actors like you say. It would be nice if you could pick a lane and stick with it as to exactly what you think we are.
You had zero success with anyone else on the forum. It's genuinely sad that you think you did.
Edit: Damn, he got got by moderation. Just as the conversation was becoming productive!
I'm not a mod, but my understanding of the disengagement rule is that it's supposed to just be "disengage" not a whole message "getting the last word in". Not accusing you of doing that, but that's how I understand the rule.
Correct. Oftentimes we disagree on dumb shit, and the best course of action is to not let it devolve into childs' play.
You can't be a ePiCuReAn ReVoLuTiOnArY lIbErTaRiAn SoCiAlIsT and spam shit like this and then end the last line w/ "disengage" as if they can't now respond to the 3 paragraphs of text.
It's insanely bad-faith.
I completely agree with you, it is very bad faith. Since he's an admin I tried to be nice and assume the best, but returning to this thread I see it didn't really matter
(when I made my comment it showed as his being the last in thread and not removed)
Didn't this happen last time too?