The mods of all the major communities there remove comments criticism Hexbear and usually follow it up with a ban. It’s absolutely clear what is happening and it shouldn’t be allowed to continue.

  • BrikoX@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Rules in question stated as a reason for removing the comments and temporary ban:

    1. No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
    2. Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.

    People can make their own conclusions.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      They can write whatever bullshit they want as a reason. If the comment is gone, who’s gonna check? Hell, who audits that at all?

      • Lath@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        bigotry
        ˈbɪɡətri
        noun
        obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

        If the person in question went after them simply because they are part of the group called ‘tankies’, the first rule was broken.
        If the person in question was the first to throw out insults, the second rule was broken.

        If however the opposing group initiated the conflict, broke the same rules and was not punished, then the complaint here is fair and should be pursued in order to prevent an escalation of abuse.

        The nasty thing about bigotry is that by definition, it doesn’t matter which group is being discriminated against. It accepts all discrimination under its label.

        • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          We generally don’t consider something to be bigotry if it is directed at an ideology or behavior that people can control. Ability or disability, gender, religious/ethnic background, race, age, nationality, etc. are all factors that are beyond an individual’s control.

            • Lath@kbin.earth
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              You can try, within your interpretation of their rules. And if you get banned for that, take pictures.

            • Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Of course not. They apply their rules subjectively.

              For instance I got rule 1’d for saying “Fuck China” but I bet you, you wouldn’t get banned for saying “Fuck America” or “Fuck Israel” (fuck ‘em all imo).

              • Lath@kbin.earth
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                If you have evidence of abuse and selective enforcement of the rules, show it in order to allow the admins to act on it.
                Don’t just lash out, document the exchange. Keep a record of the favouritism.

              • Lemminary@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                I got rule 1 for posting an image of a yassified Patrick because I, a huge homo, may find discomfort in what gay memes I share, I guess!

          • Lath@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Understandable, however, generalities sometimes aren’t enough in a court of law.
            The difference between the spirit and letter of the law allows for interpretations that don’t agree with each other. As we can see in this situation.

            And like it or not, this is a social court of law. Moderators and admins are judges who follow the rules and administer relative justice. You can either agree to give them the latitude to have their own interpretation of the rules as long as they stick to them, or you make concise rules that offer no room for discussion.

            You might say each instance can have its own rules and that is true, but when those written rules are the same and defederation starts to happen because there is disagreement on the meaning of those words, the “in general” part is going to be the mainstay of how rules are enforced.

            And, in general, that’s part of what causes societies to fall.