Commented on a post with the most recent (non-Breitbart) headline and updates. Added this with 3 independent sources:
FYI, Breitbart is a far-right, low-quality source.
Mod apparently didnāt like a more reputable source being added to their post because it was removed in minutes lol.
reason: Rule 6 Violation
Rule 6: Using the Poisoning The Well fallacy to attack sources shared in a post is presently not allowed (this rule may change in the future, and isolated instances will not subject you to a permanent ban)
Just admit you want an echo chamber to spread disinformation and promote biased articles! Using this rule to police sources is very thinly-veiled censorshipā¦
Have you heard the Nazi bar story? Not being sarcastic here, itās honestly pertinent to your situation.
Yes of course.
But scrolling through their history I hesitate to throw that label so strongly. Would you ban them? Actually, you havenāt done so despite having the capability. Nor their communities.
I think my problem is more that theyāre such a prolific poster on my small instance that it reflects more on my instance. Like if I had a few other communities that were larger than theirs I probably wouldnāt worry about it so much.
Hm⦠I just looked over their comment history and I have to say you kind of have a point. I have RCR mentally categorized as a bad-faith engager, but I really donāt see much at all of that after a quick glance over what theyāve actually been doing.
I think there is a big example set in conservative media that the right way to go about things is to spew propaganda, or be āsnarkyā and refuse to engage with reasonable conversation about politics in favor of just dunking on the opposition. That comes across as āfun,ā or as sort of doing battle for āyour teamā in the marketplace of ideas, and I think people are taken in by the idea of it even if theyāre not necessarily bad people or intending to do anything wrong. Looking over RCRās history Iām going to take back what I said about their intent being to violate the social contract. I think theyāre just posting a bunch of conservative stuff. Which, of course, thereās a lot of overlap between that and naked propaganda, but that doesnāt necessarily have to be their fault or their intent if thatās just the media they consume.
@realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club as an olive branch Iām going to ask you about some details of some of the stuff youāve said recently, under appropriate comment threads. You donāt have to answer my questions of course if you donāt want to. I am just trying to sort out whether you are (1) posting this stuff because you think itās true (2) posting it because ādoing battle for your teamā so to speak is the pattern of behavior you see, by fun conservative commentators youāre trying to emulate (3) posting it because youāve independently decided that you donāt give a shit whether itās true as long as it āfeelsā like a win for your side. Those are somewhat different behaviors, as far as how youāre treating the social contract and as far as the Nazi bar analogy people have been talking about here, and so if you want people to treat you and your instance some certain way you might want people to be placing you in the earlier categories instead of the later ones.
Edit: Oh, one of the comments I wanted to respond to is not federated here. My question is:
Where did you read this? Can I find out more details about why you think this is happening, and read for myself the argument that it is happening?
Hey! I really appreciate you looping me in on this.
For the things I post, Iāll usually post them because I either 1) think that the content is probably both relevant and true, 2) it portrays a relevant perspective, or 3) is just plain interesting
If any articles I share make false claims in a community like @news@thelemmy.club then Iām more than happy to remove them. For places like @opeds@thelemmy.club Iām not as careful and I hope itās clear that the stuff over there or at @rightwingvideos@thelemmy.club arenāt always going to be 100% true or objective.
Now as far as my behavior is concerned @bdonvr@bdonvr@thelemmy.club if Iām no longer welcome here Iāll leave. Many of my communities here are continuations of my old Lotide communities, and I only left that software because itās abandonware now. Iām sure at this point thereād be other Lemmy instances I could go to if you donāt like what I post here.
Edit: Also, the point of Rule 6 was to reduce spam, as my communities were starting to get brigaded by leftists basically saying āfake newsā verbatim in the comment sections of certain news posts. I donāt like those types of rules, but it seems necessary for now since it keeps happening. Itās a neutral rule, so if anyone says āfake newsā on an article from a center or left leaning source Iāll remove that comment too.
Edit 2:
This was something I noticed during BLM riots particularly, and in some blue areas afterwards like in New York (though not as prominently since the riots), thereād be cases of somebody stealing something or hurting someone, caught on video, and the DA would refuse to place charges on the individual. For the life of me I couldnāt figure out why else they would do that.
Now to be fair I think there was some overlap between the BLM riots and me still watching Steven Crowder so maybe some of the stuff I observed at the time wasnāt entirely accurate or correct (I stopped watching him during the Summer Of Love because I noticed he wasnāt as truthful as he claimed to be during his coverage)