KemonoMoe

Yes. I think the world in general should get over its hangups around sexual and physiological reality, I think the villification of these, prevalent in many cultures, should end. Because it is harmful.

We don't shy away from the reality of violence to anywhere near the same extent, and the world would not be better for it, if we did.

You're not going to invalidate that view by claiming it's merely an attempt to lable people who disagree.

Like actively expressing how mad you are through your speech tone.

I have no idea what you mean by this. Again, no emotion was involved in our initial discussion on my end, but apparently you thought there was some secret insult in it, then?

Please do not interpret meaning where none exists. That isn't fair to me, or yourself.

I'm not sure if there is a Lemmy as a group with uniform mindset. Maybe more like an individual instance or even community or group of communities.

Every single post ever posted, shows up in the "all" feeds of all instances with at least one subscriber of the relevant community. Excluding users only browsing their subscription, or users that have a bunch of things blocked, everyone has a chance to see anything/everything. And therefore also to comment, report, or vote.

In fact, the more active a community becomes, the more people outside it will see its content.

Federated social media does not sequester users into separate "echo chambers". There is always overlap. That's kind of the point.

Then we at touhou at LW are fine.

Are you? Again, I dare you to announce how you've handled my ban.

It's just you not liking the fact that your disrespectful behavior wasn't tolerated.

I never got rude until after I thought I was unfairly banned.

Even then it was mostly because I thought you deliberately shut down communication. That was incorrect, and learning that I had no difficulty dropping the anger.

You're the one having a hard time treating me fairly, despite learning my side of things.

I would rather stick with peoples who can voice their opinion without disparaging anyone or being snarky.

So would I. Unfortunately you mod a community I care about, so I'd rather have you do better, than put in the work of replacing you.

But, since you made that choice for me, here we are.

And you doesn't seem to acknowledge issues in what you have written under two last posts at LW or prove that what you free of these issues.

And you apparently can't handle dissent, or accept criticism that isnt sugar-coated.

People can still have a valid point, even if they're pissed as hell while saying it.

If you get to let the "feeling" someone gives you affect whether you try to improve their behaviour, or just banish them outright, I get to write in a way that shows I'm annoyed, when I'm annoyed. That was the Marisa post.

Up to about a 30-day ban, and I'd have just gone "oops, guess I got on their nerves, gotta be nicer".

A year-long ban was more of a "wow, this person needs to get over themself".

I dropped the swears and agression the second you told me you never got most of my DMs. Why can't you drop a year-long ban when you find out you were wrong about someone intentionally breaking the rules to screw with you?

As for whether I could have been nicer in the Youmu post... Sure I could have. But why should I have? I was neutral. I did not attack you. I presented arguments, not insults. I initially expressed disbelief, but only because that is what I felt. After that my goal was to understand your position, and if possible, change it.

There was no ill intent. I simply did my best to change someone's mind. Asking me to be nice beyond that, is to ask for special treatment. Do you want special treatment?

Having someone try to change your mind can feel like an attack, but it isn't one.

Perhaps you should ask yourself whether it is you who are refusing to take me seriously, because you've "labeled" me.

Earlier, you used the "your behaviour confirms my suspicions" argument which is a classic come-back when a troll goes off the rails, but that only remains valid with people who don't calm down and come back to logic when shown they were wrong about something.

It's also the kind of come-back I avoid using myself, because it's a "I know what you are" argument. Meaning, it's an attempt to invalidate what someone is saying, because of what they are.

That is not a valid counterargument.