this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024
140 points (76.9% liked)

politics

19233 readers
3809 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

You may have noticed a distinct lack of return2ozma. This is due to their admitting, in a public comment, that their engagement here is in bad faith:

I'm sure there will be questions, let me see if I can address the most obvious ones:

  1. Can I still post negative stuff about Biden?

Absolutely! We have zero interest in running an echo chamber. However, if ALL you're posting is negative, you may want to re-think your priorities. You get out of the world what you put into it and all that.

  1. Why now?

Presumption of innocence. It may be my own fault, but I do try to think the best of people, and even though they were posting negative articles, they weren't necessarily WRONG. Biden's poll numbers, particularly in minority demographics ARE in the shitter. They are starting to get better, but he still has a hell of a hill to climb.

  1. Why a 30 day temp ban and not a permanent ban?

The articles return2ozma shared weren't bad, faked, or from some wing-nut bias site like "beforeitsnews.com", they were legitimate articles from established and respected news agencies, pointing out the valid problems Biden faces.

The problem was ONLY posting the negatives, over and over and then openly admitting that dishonest enagement is their purpose.

Had they all been bullshit articles? It would not have taken anywhere near this much time to lay the ban and it would have been permanent.

30 days seems enough time for them to re-think their strategery and come back to engage honestly.

tl;dr - https://youtu.be/C6BYzLIqKB8#t=7s

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

There lots of comments on ozuma articles saying they are bullshit as well. If people that only post positive stuff don't get banned it's just an echo chamber, it's just as bad faith as only negative at that point.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (5 children)

I am interested in the fact that as of this moment, the pro-ozma speakers in this thread come from:

  • kbin.run
  • fedia.io
  • kbin.earth
  • sh.itjust.works
  • slrpnk.net
  • lemmy.sdf.org

And the anti-ozma speakers come from:

  • lemmy.world
  • lemm.ee
  • lemmy.world
  • mbin.grits.dev
  • programming.dev
  • lemmy.world
  • discuss.tchncs.de
  • lemmy.world

It is very interesting to me that each individual one of the pro-ozma speakers comes from a different instance, with no repetition. Could be a coincidence of course, but looking over the two lists it's hard not to notice a clear disparity. And, as a pure hypothetical, it would make it very difficult for any individual admin to detect a duplication of IP address between any two of the accounts. And there's no lemmy.world. Purely hypothetically speaking of course.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

It's likely a coincidence.

I blocked Ozma months ago, because seeing his posts did not spark joy and blocking him has improved my experience on Lemmy, and generally I think this is a good moderator decision. But I hadn't commented because I mostly agree with the temporary ban and I wasn't seeing his posts anyway.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nice argument; So im some sort of shill/bot/alt now? I guess this conversation is over then.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

I would find this constant paranoid suspicion of yours more amusing if it weren't so condescending toward people who do not share your worldview.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Mm yes we must be pro that account and not anti how dumb/silly the reasoning is.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I was kbin.social before this until they got unstable.

Might want to add that one.

But please, go through my history and continue to call me an alt

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I didn't say you were an alt; I said the first list looks way way different than the second list.

In the interval while I was typing, a couple of other pro-ozma people from lemmy.world chimed in. But I'm gonna leave it. That's how it looked when I checked, and the way it looked when I checked is pretty weird.

[–] Ensign_Crab -1 points 6 months ago

That’s how it looked when I checked, and the way it looked when I checked is pretty weird.

Must be a conspiracy.