PieFed Meta

1641 readers

15 users here now

Discuss PieFed project direction, provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics.

Wiki

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

rimu@piefed.social

What's the best way to report the abusive modon piefed.social? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by hddsx@lemmy.ca to c/piefed_meta@piefed.social

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This guy is literally messaging people after he gets downvoted because he doesn't like the word "Bro".

"Bro" was literally used as an expression of disbelief.

from atomicpoet @piefed.social

You’re receiving this message because I consider the word “bro” to be offensive, and I noticed you downvoted my request that a commenter avoid using it.

I want to politely ask that you not encourage language or behaviour that could bring toxicity into !fediversenews@piefed.social .

This is a friendly warning. If it happens again, I will have to issue a ban.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] suff@piefed.social 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

How about you founding !abusive_mods@piefed.social ?

[–] sk1nnym1ke@piefed.social 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

There is already an established community for those issues

!yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, the mods on that comm aren't much better than the ones they critique.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

They're still considered the reference community in that field

For people wanting to learn more about the disagreements between PugJesus and dbzer0 mods: https://lemmy.world/post/35341263

Edit: goat's follow up explanation

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

For people wanting to learn more about the disagreements between PugJesus and dbzer0 mods: https://lemmy.world/post/35341263

The post mentions me in the title, but the only part of the massive body actually involving me is me answering a question about why I was temp banned for downvoting comments I disagreed with

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

More posts discussing the fallout:

Dbzer0 admin claiming Uyghur genocide is ‘overblown and misrepresented’

Dbzer0 admin casually defending Uyghur genocide denial because “libs worse”, yikes

Banned from meanwhileongrad for “No db0 allowed”.

On Dbzer0, ‘harassing mods’ is when you criticize the top admin of .ml for responding to a Wiki link with a Lemmy search

Out of those 4 posts, 3 were made by you, I didn't check the whole list

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Again, the body doesn't discuss me despite mentioning me in the title; my posts are linked to, but why you would link to someone else linking to my posts without comment as an addendum while discussing someone else instead of linking to my posts - since the end result is the same, except for the extraneous association with another argument - is deeply questionable.

This is not unlike when you repeatedly attempted to link me to the 196 move despite having nothing to do with the move.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

why you would link to someone else linking to my posts without comment as an addendum while discussing someone else instead of linking to my posts - since the end result is the same, except for the extraneous association with another argument - is deeply questionable.

So that people can read the several comments you made in that thread, as well as the dbzer0 users answers.

This is not unlike when you repeatedly attempted to link me to the 196 move despite having nothing to do with the move.

I updated my comments there, as I said at the time: https://lemmy.world/comment/18437409

Bringing up that point when I corrected it seems "deeply questionable" as well.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Bringing up that point when I corrected it seems “deeply questionable” as well.

Your 'correction' attempts to make the same connection as the original claim, it was nothing more than adding weasel words.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 days ago

I removed what was incorrect.

Adding weasel words

People will judge