▲ 768 ▼ Sen. Lindsey Graham dies at 71 after ‘brief and sudden illness’ (www.nbcnews.com) submitted 4 weeks ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 396 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -69 points 4 weeks ago (10 children) Basic humanity? Graham lacked it, doesn't mean we should. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 19 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 105 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (3 children) So if we celebrated hitler's death we lack humanity? People should be free to celebrate a death if they feel to. Forcing your idea of a moral code over people is not nice. We are not talking about celebrating violence, a crime or wishing for somebody's death. People should be free to express their feelings if they don't hurt anyone, without having to fear the morality police. The point of modorators should be to create a welcoming and safe space, not to impose your morality on others. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -48 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Doesn't matter if you think it's "nice" or not. It's a rule for this community. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 34 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Yes, and you could have answered "thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons", instead you basically tell me "Doesn't matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed". I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (6 children) I don't make the rules here, but I do enforce them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 31 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Right, "you were just doing your job" ... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them. Is it a bannable offense or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You're a moderator right? Doesn't that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -5 points 3 weeks ago The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) I think the larger point is maybe you shouldn't be allowed to, because you've admitted to arbitrarily suspending that rule when someone YOU are fine celebrating dies, like Kissinger. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) It was a mutual decision, not mine alone. I believe the exact quote was "Yeah, rule 6, but fuck that guy." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies) [–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago "nanana boo boo" permalink fedilink source parent [–] CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 20 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) You should answer the question posed though… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Disingenuous questions don't get answers. Ask a question in good faith and I'll answer it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies) load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) No, no, you don’t get it. It’s not about being nice, it’s about telegraphing what a good, nonthreatening supplicant you are permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -35 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) I already said he was an asshole and cited the reason, that's not supplication. You don't have to celebrate death to prove you aren't a supplicant. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 23 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (4 children) Reason enough for people with basic human empathy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) It might help you understand WHY you're getting ratioed if you understand this: Lindsay Graham was basically a serial killer who used votes rather than knives. Imagine a serial killer murdered someone you love. Wouldn't you cheer when you find out he's died? Wouldn't you be happy he is dead and no longer able to harm others the way he harmed your loved one? That's how we feel about Graham dying. That's what we're celebrating. Graham is the serial killer who murdered our mama, and we're happy to see him die. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 68 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Jesus fucking Christ. We’re really doing this high road virtue signaling bullshit here, too? Cool. Continue being part of the problem, I guess. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) If you don't like it, make your own community. It's a stated rule here. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 19 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -7 points 4 weeks ago (7 children) Nope, no rule against it so long as you continue being civil about it. Shading over into personal attacks would break rule 3. Some communities have a rule against meta commentary, which this would fall under, but we don't have that rule here. Which is weird because !world@lemmy.world DOES have that rule and both were set up by the same person. (Rule #6 in World) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 weeks ago* (1 child) Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (6 replies) [–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 62 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Ahhhh, the "when they go low, we go high" approach. Gee whizz, that approach has really been working out so far, hasn't it... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 4 weeks ago i mean i go everywhere high. it's worked pretty well for me. i get i'm a bit of an outlier though permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 33 points 4 weeks ago (18 children) Not positive that you should be enforcing your own personal ethics onto other people. Free speech should be a thing. If a person did bad things and people are glad that he is no longer in a position to do bad things, that is a celebration in itself. Trying to enforce opinions like this is self-congratulatory in that you consider your opinion is superior and worthy of judicial enforcement. Note that I haven't in the slightest commented on the man himself, yet still run the risk of banning. It all depends upon the moderator. This happens on Reddit all the time and that's the problem with this kind of moderation. It has a chilling effect. Give a censor a job and they tend to censor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 19 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Freedom of speech is what the government controls. You have no freedom of speech within a private entity like social media. The TOS sets the overall rules, each community further defines them. The Lemmy instances which are "do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" get de-federated pretty damn quickly due to the raw sewage they pump out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies) load more comments (17 replies) [–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml 30 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Would you celebrate the death of Hitler? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 weeks ago About eighty years too late, but at the time I feel like I would've. permalink fedilink source parent [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) JL has previously said that Black Lives Matter was a bad thing and has removed psots critical of Israel. So that answers your question. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 16 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) That is a ratio. Maybe the rules should be put to a vote by the community? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -14 points 3 weeks ago The community doesn't set the rules, that way lies madness. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 12 points 4 weeks ago* Ok agreed. No surprise night raping or murdering people in colonial genocide projects that Graham Cracker. I hope we'll all live to celebrate that fucker dying some day too. Now on the celebrations. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago No. This high road bullshit is why we are in the hole we’re in now. You want to play the game, you need to understand the rules. And you naive to think anything else. I won’t condone murder, but this fucker deserves his abrupt death and the vitriol that follows. We will always be at the mercy of those fucks because of people like you and it’s time you understand. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fyzzlefry 6 points 3 weeks ago I'd like to advocate for a reexamination of that rule. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 105 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (3 children) So if we celebrated hitler's death we lack humanity? People should be free to celebrate a death if they feel to. Forcing your idea of a moral code over people is not nice. We are not talking about celebrating violence, a crime or wishing for somebody's death. People should be free to express their feelings if they don't hurt anyone, without having to fear the morality police. The point of modorators should be to create a welcoming and safe space, not to impose your morality on others. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -48 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Doesn't matter if you think it's "nice" or not. It's a rule for this community. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 34 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Yes, and you could have answered "thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons", instead you basically tell me "Doesn't matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed". I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (6 children) I don't make the rules here, but I do enforce them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 31 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Right, "you were just doing your job" ... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them. Is it a bannable offense or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You're a moderator right? Doesn't that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -5 points 3 weeks ago The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) I think the larger point is maybe you shouldn't be allowed to, because you've admitted to arbitrarily suspending that rule when someone YOU are fine celebrating dies, like Kissinger. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) It was a mutual decision, not mine alone. I believe the exact quote was "Yeah, rule 6, but fuck that guy." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies) [–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago "nanana boo boo" permalink fedilink source parent [–] CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 20 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) You should answer the question posed though… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Disingenuous questions don't get answers. Ask a question in good faith and I'll answer it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies) load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) No, no, you don’t get it. It’s not about being nice, it’s about telegraphing what a good, nonthreatening supplicant you are permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -35 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) I already said he was an asshole and cited the reason, that's not supplication. You don't have to celebrate death to prove you aren't a supplicant. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 23 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (4 children) Reason enough for people with basic human empathy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) It might help you understand WHY you're getting ratioed if you understand this: Lindsay Graham was basically a serial killer who used votes rather than knives. Imagine a serial killer murdered someone you love. Wouldn't you cheer when you find out he's died? Wouldn't you be happy he is dead and no longer able to harm others the way he harmed your loved one? That's how we feel about Graham dying. That's what we're celebrating. Graham is the serial killer who murdered our mama, and we're happy to see him die. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) load more comments (1 reply)
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -48 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Doesn't matter if you think it's "nice" or not. It's a rule for this community. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 34 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Yes, and you could have answered "thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons", instead you basically tell me "Doesn't matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed". I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (6 children) I don't make the rules here, but I do enforce them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 31 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Right, "you were just doing your job" ... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them. Is it a bannable offense or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You're a moderator right? Doesn't that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -5 points 3 weeks ago The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) I think the larger point is maybe you shouldn't be allowed to, because you've admitted to arbitrarily suspending that rule when someone YOU are fine celebrating dies, like Kissinger. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) It was a mutual decision, not mine alone. I believe the exact quote was "Yeah, rule 6, but fuck that guy." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies) [–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago "nanana boo boo" permalink fedilink source parent [–] CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 20 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) You should answer the question posed though… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Disingenuous questions don't get answers. Ask a question in good faith and I'll answer it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies) load more comments (1 reply)
[–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 34 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Yes, and you could have answered "thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons", instead you basically tell me "Doesn't matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed". I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (6 children) I don't make the rules here, but I do enforce them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 31 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Right, "you were just doing your job" ... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them. Is it a bannable offense or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You're a moderator right? Doesn't that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -5 points 3 weeks ago The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) I think the larger point is maybe you shouldn't be allowed to, because you've admitted to arbitrarily suspending that rule when someone YOU are fine celebrating dies, like Kissinger. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) It was a mutual decision, not mine alone. I believe the exact quote was "Yeah, rule 6, but fuck that guy." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies) [–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago "nanana boo boo" permalink fedilink source parent
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (6 children) I don't make the rules here, but I do enforce them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 31 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Right, "you were just doing your job" ... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them. Is it a bannable offense or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You're a moderator right? Doesn't that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -5 points 3 weeks ago The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) I think the larger point is maybe you shouldn't be allowed to, because you've admitted to arbitrarily suspending that rule when someone YOU are fine celebrating dies, like Kissinger. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) It was a mutual decision, not mine alone. I believe the exact quote was "Yeah, rule 6, but fuck that guy." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub 31 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Right, "you were just doing your job" ... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them. Is it a bannable offense or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You're a moderator right? Doesn't that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -5 points 3 weeks ago The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -5 points 3 weeks ago The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) I think the larger point is maybe you shouldn't be allowed to, because you've admitted to arbitrarily suspending that rule when someone YOU are fine celebrating dies, like Kissinger. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) It was a mutual decision, not mine alone. I believe the exact quote was "Yeah, rule 6, but fuck that guy." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) It was a mutual decision, not mine alone. I believe the exact quote was "Yeah, rule 6, but fuck that guy." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago OK, so a better way to phrase that would be that the collective "you" has no business enforcing a rule that "you" decided not to enforce against yourselves, because "you" happened to agree with the death. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 20 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) You should answer the question posed though… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Disingenuous questions don't get answers. Ask a question in good faith and I'll answer it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies) load more comments (1 reply)
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Disingenuous questions don't get answers. Ask a question in good faith and I'll answer it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies)
[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) No, no, you don’t get it. It’s not about being nice, it’s about telegraphing what a good, nonthreatening supplicant you are permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -35 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) I already said he was an asshole and cited the reason, that's not supplication. You don't have to celebrate death to prove you aren't a supplicant. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 23 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (4 children) Reason enough for people with basic human empathy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) It might help you understand WHY you're getting ratioed if you understand this: Lindsay Graham was basically a serial killer who used votes rather than knives. Imagine a serial killer murdered someone you love. Wouldn't you cheer when you find out he's died? Wouldn't you be happy he is dead and no longer able to harm others the way he harmed your loved one? That's how we feel about Graham dying. That's what we're celebrating. Graham is the serial killer who murdered our mama, and we're happy to see him die. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -35 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) I already said he was an asshole and cited the reason, that's not supplication. You don't have to celebrate death to prove you aren't a supplicant. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 23 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (4 children) Reason enough for people with basic human empathy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) It might help you understand WHY you're getting ratioed if you understand this: Lindsay Graham was basically a serial killer who used votes rather than knives. Imagine a serial killer murdered someone you love. Wouldn't you cheer when you find out he's died? Wouldn't you be happy he is dead and no longer able to harm others the way he harmed your loved one? That's how we feel about Graham dying. That's what we're celebrating. Graham is the serial killer who murdered our mama, and we're happy to see him die. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)
[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 23 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (4 children) Reason enough for people with basic human empathy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies)
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (4 children) Reason enough for people with basic human empathy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) It might help you understand WHY you're getting ratioed if you understand this: Lindsay Graham was basically a serial killer who used votes rather than knives. Imagine a serial killer murdered someone you love. Wouldn't you cheer when you find out he's died? Wouldn't you be happy he is dead and no longer able to harm others the way he harmed your loved one? That's how we feel about Graham dying. That's what we're celebrating. Graham is the serial killer who murdered our mama, and we're happy to see him die. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)
[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 68 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Jesus fucking Christ. We’re really doing this high road virtue signaling bullshit here, too? Cool. Continue being part of the problem, I guess. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) If you don't like it, make your own community. It's a stated rule here. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 19 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -7 points 4 weeks ago (7 children) Nope, no rule against it so long as you continue being civil about it. Shading over into personal attacks would break rule 3. Some communities have a rule against meta commentary, which this would fall under, but we don't have that rule here. Which is weird because !world@lemmy.world DOES have that rule and both were set up by the same person. (Rule #6 in World) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 weeks ago* (1 child) Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (6 replies)
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) If you don't like it, make your own community. It's a stated rule here. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 19 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -7 points 4 weeks ago (7 children) Nope, no rule against it so long as you continue being civil about it. Shading over into personal attacks would break rule 3. Some communities have a rule against meta commentary, which this would fall under, but we don't have that rule here. Which is weird because !world@lemmy.world DOES have that rule and both were set up by the same person. (Rule #6 in World) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 weeks ago* (1 child) Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (6 replies)
[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 19 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -7 points 4 weeks ago (7 children) Nope, no rule against it so long as you continue being civil about it. Shading over into personal attacks would break rule 3. Some communities have a rule against meta commentary, which this would fall under, but we don't have that rule here. Which is weird because !world@lemmy.world DOES have that rule and both were set up by the same person. (Rule #6 in World) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 weeks ago* (1 child) Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (6 replies)
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -7 points 4 weeks ago (7 children) Nope, no rule against it so long as you continue being civil about it. Shading over into personal attacks would break rule 3. Some communities have a rule against meta commentary, which this would fall under, but we don't have that rule here. Which is weird because !world@lemmy.world DOES have that rule and both were set up by the same person. (Rule #6 in World) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 weeks ago* (1 child) Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (6 replies)
[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 weeks ago* (1 child) Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -8 points 3 weeks ago I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 62 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Ahhhh, the "when they go low, we go high" approach. Gee whizz, that approach has really been working out so far, hasn't it... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 4 weeks ago i mean i go everywhere high. it's worked pretty well for me. i get i'm a bit of an outlier though permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 4 weeks ago i mean i go everywhere high. it's worked pretty well for me. i get i'm a bit of an outlier though permalink fedilink source parent
[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 33 points 4 weeks ago (18 children) Not positive that you should be enforcing your own personal ethics onto other people. Free speech should be a thing. If a person did bad things and people are glad that he is no longer in a position to do bad things, that is a celebration in itself. Trying to enforce opinions like this is self-congratulatory in that you consider your opinion is superior and worthy of judicial enforcement. Note that I haven't in the slightest commented on the man himself, yet still run the risk of banning. It all depends upon the moderator. This happens on Reddit all the time and that's the problem with this kind of moderation. It has a chilling effect. Give a censor a job and they tend to censor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 19 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Freedom of speech is what the government controls. You have no freedom of speech within a private entity like social media. The TOS sets the overall rules, each community further defines them. The Lemmy instances which are "do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" get de-federated pretty damn quickly due to the raw sewage they pump out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies) load more comments (17 replies)
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -9 points 3 weeks ago (4 children) Freedom of speech is what the government controls. You have no freedom of speech within a private entity like social media. The TOS sets the overall rules, each community further defines them. The Lemmy instances which are "do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" get de-federated pretty damn quickly due to the raw sewage they pump out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml 30 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Would you celebrate the death of Hitler? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 weeks ago About eighty years too late, but at the time I feel like I would've. permalink fedilink source parent [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) JL has previously said that Black Lives Matter was a bad thing and has removed psots critical of Israel. So that answers your question. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 weeks ago About eighty years too late, but at the time I feel like I would've. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) JL has previously said that Black Lives Matter was a bad thing and has removed psots critical of Israel. So that answers your question. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 16 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) That is a ratio. Maybe the rules should be put to a vote by the community? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -14 points 3 weeks ago The community doesn't set the rules, that way lies madness. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -14 points 3 weeks ago The community doesn't set the rules, that way lies madness. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 12 points 4 weeks ago* Ok agreed. No surprise night raping or murdering people in colonial genocide projects that Graham Cracker. I hope we'll all live to celebrate that fucker dying some day too. Now on the celebrations. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago No. This high road bullshit is why we are in the hole we’re in now. You want to play the game, you need to understand the rules. And you naive to think anything else. I won’t condone murder, but this fucker deserves his abrupt death and the vitriol that follows. We will always be at the mercy of those fucks because of people like you and it’s time you understand. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fyzzlefry 6 points 3 weeks ago I'd like to advocate for a reexamination of that rule. permalink fedilink source parent