I just noticed this randomly, because I wasn’t able to vote on a post.

My guess: Someone didn’t like that I am also subscribed to anti-AI communities.

  • Ricky Rigatoni@piefed.zipEnglish
    3115·
    10 days ago

    MysticMushroom mass bans everyone who downvotes in the dbzero ai communities. Notable power tripper, and db0 himself is unwilling to do anything about it. I think it might be a good idea for anti-ai people to just block dbzero if things don’t change.

    • Wren@lemmy.todayEnglish
      212·
      10 days ago

      That a better argument in favor of Db0, that they’re not going to micromanage someone’s communities for them when anyone can just block what they don’t like.

      • Ricky Rigatoni@piefed.zipEnglish
        815·
        10 days ago

        On the other hand, if you’re going to have a shitfit over downvotes and mass ban people and accuse them of being trolls, move to an instance that disables downvoting.

        • Wren@lemmy.todayEnglish
          151·
          10 days ago

          I’m not arguing for or against MM. I’m arguing against the idea that it’s Db0’s responsibility.

          • Ricky Rigatoni@piefed.zipEnglish
            614·
            10 days ago

            I think it is the responsibility of the admins to keep their moderators from acting like reddit mods and abusing their position for the health of their instances. Nobody is going to want to use an instance if they get banned from half the active communities just for one downvote of slopaganda. If deebs doesn’t care about this, that’s fine in the end. We’ll just find somewhere else to discuss piracy and anarchism. Like anarchist.nexus, hopefully.

    • PapaSkwat@lemmy.today
      1414·
      10 days ago

      I think it might be a good idea for anti-ai people to just block dbzero if things don’t change.

      Or just block the communities they don’t like. Why are you suggesting someone block the entire instance, just because they may not like AI? That seems silly.

      • Ricky Rigatoni@piefed.zipEnglish
        176·
        10 days ago

        Being banned from Europe, a community that has nothing to do with AI, for anti-ai behavior proves my point.

        • Unruffled [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
          162·
          10 days ago

          You have a legit point here. Mystic really shouldn’t be banning people from c/Europe on the basis of anti-genAI sentiment, even if there was evidence of such. I cautioned Mystic against doing that already, but as a mod there’s no easy way to ban from only a subset of your communities without a lot of manual work, so it’s really a side effect of the fact lemmy itself doesn’t expose an easy way to ban selectively. Which is, I agree, unfortunate.

        • AzuranAurora@piefed.caEnglish
          101·
          10 days ago

          This nutcase reminds me of Antiyanks, a mentally ill individual who spent all their time making hundreds of alts like this person. Harassment well beyond any reasonable measure using hundreds of alt accounts on instances with open signups.

  • black0ut@pawb.social
    11·
    8 days ago

    Same thing happened to me, with the same mod. It keeps happening. I would understand banning users from AI related comms (it’s not like we’re gonna visit them if we don’t like AI). But banning from !europe@lemmy.dbzer0.com is a bit too far.

    Message Grainne, the only other active mod in that community, and you can get unbanned. That’s what I did.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    124·
    10 days ago

    Definitely PTB. User history of OP here has no recent examples of trolling of any kind, nor any examples of even complaining about ai. Didn’t go back far because for a ban on a troll basis to be valid, it would need to be evident in a month or less of activity. If someone isn’t trolling in that period of time at all, they aren’t a troll. They may or may not occasionally pull a troll (I’m guilty of that lol), but that isn’t the same as the level of action needed to be a troll.

    Thus, no ban would be justified at all in thia case. The two things cited as reason simply aren’t there.

    Tbh, it’s one of the most egregious examples of PTB I’ve seen in a while. While I’m actually very much in favor of a limited degree of admin scrutiny of mods, this is one of those cases where it would be justified for db0 to apply some degree or correction.

    Edit: scrolled back even further just because I’m bored. Two months since the most teeny mention of ai in OP’s comments, and it was in no way rabid or unreasonable. A simple observation about the changes ai has caused in search results. The next most recent was a casual mention of the ai bubble, and didn’t even constitute a complaint. OP has complained on their account less about ai in three months than I have in a week in meatspace. Makes the PTB even more glaring because it means the mod in question had to go digging to find something public to object to.

  • tacosanonymous@mander.xyz
    53·
    10 days ago

    Probably ptb.

    Do you know if you’ve downvoted a lot? I think my old account got banned from some comms bc they were popping up in “all” and I was downvoting them.

    • lichtmetzger@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      8·
      10 days ago

      I cannot rule out downvoting some posts in that community, but I didn’t specifically go there to mass-downvote. I didn’t even notice I was banned until five months later, that’s how much I engaged with it. 😄

    • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
      14·
      10 days ago

      probably participated in a comms that they dint like, so its pre-emptive ban, like with reddit they can cross ban you, just because you participated in a sub.