196
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
view the rest of the comments
https://youtu.be/FZLQXJFVMoU?
inb4, didn't watch, too long
this guy does go over a lot of clips and context about hasan's apparent stance on these things before the incident, i don't get anything out of trying to break anything down further for anyone, but i know how i feel about it, unfortunately it does take time to form your own opinion esp if you're insistent on also having it spoonfed to you
Thanks for the assist. Im sure when provided with information contrary to their belief they will think critically. :p
I find listing sources to be incredibly helpful but this is one of those cases where all the primary are biased anyway so why bother.
K, watched the whole thing.
Its basically a guy trying to follow the evolution of the ... collective narrative about the whole thing.
Really doesn't help that he meanders and imprecisely restates and misquotes all over the place, makes 0 attempt to distinguish between objective and subjective claims.
Anyway, the original thing I asked for, was evidence of:
The video you here linked has evidence of only this last one, and specifically notes that there is no way to know whether or not the collar was modified prior to or after the inciting incident.
It has LonerBox giving a likely model of the collar, and noting that it looks like the variant that can shock, but can also have the prongs removed and just vibrate.
Then the presenter here says well, it could be that those prongs had been removed for a while, covered up by electrical tape, and that people are just assuming that that was done after the fact.
It then has a video of Hasan saying... that dog training from this particular trainer, will result in the dog being able to follow commands while off leash, motioning to his neck while he does this.
The trainer says it involves a shock collar. Hasan doesn't say that though. Hasan also doesn't challenge it.
That's not definitive proof of anything other than maybe at one point the shock collar was used in Kaya's training, these guys are all stumbling over each other for their turn to speak in a crowded environment, this isn't a very clear conversation.
So... what, are we shifting now from... Hasan shocked his dog, live, while streaming, for the crime of trying to move!
... to...
Hasan may have used a shock collar at some point earlier in Kaya's training/life.
???
These are different things, but... this presenter just keeps conflating a whole bunch of concepts and keeps going with it.
Then we get to a totally unenvidenced claim, that there is no clip for, at least not yet that I have seen, where presenter says that Hasan intially said Kaya wasn't wearing a collar at all.
After this, the entire narrative shifts again, to... why did Hasan lie? Why didn't he explain why he shocked the dog on camera?
But there's no evidence he is lying, there's no evidence that he ever said the dog was not wearing a collar.
What I have seen is people cut a clip of Hasan saying that Kaya wasn't wearing 'that' collar... you know, as in, one of many possible different kinds of collars.
But thats not even in this video, and this presenter just... states it as true, with no evidence.
... I still have not seen any definitive evidence that the clip of the inciting incident was him shocking Kaya... and there is a very plausible alternative explanation for why she yelped, that I have already outlined, that ... is also the immediate thing Hasan said was what had happened.
But we are all being told, without evidence that I have seen anywhere, that he has been lying from the start, to frame this entire discussion.
So... what... is everyone mad about, exactly?
The actual facts of the inciting incident now seem to no longer be the topic.
Remeber how I asked for evidence about that, specific evidence to establish the veracity of facts, and you claimed to provide that?
This is a gigantic drama fest of every single internet personality trying to jump on latest trending topic, which creates a massively confusing, but more engaging and dramatic narrative experience that you can parasocially be a part of! Wheee!
That's not how an actual investigation works.
This is how groupthink, gossip, and mob justice work.
yup, you're just as braindead as the rest of us, mate. glad to take up so much of your time though :p
also, the dewclaw thing is pretty bullshit imho
Ah, compelling arguments, you have swayed my opinion greatly.
i'm just another fuck on the internet enjoying a lovely breakfast this morning. any thoughts on the tail pulling or the kaya cagematch? has anyone provided any definitive evidence that the dog even has a dewclaw?