That’s because your client is caching it.

Touchpads and trackballs are my go to input devices!

A femboy posted a meme about femboys. You came in and tried to tell him that actually, some of those femboys are trans women based on their appearance.

This was a misstep, but that’s OK, because mistakes happen and people’s understanding of gender diverse folk is often limited.

He then told you about his direct lived experience as a fem boy that contradicted your opinions. At this point, instead of listening to folk who are talking about their own experiences, you got offended and started arguing.

At this point, you’re simply out of line. Arguing with folk about their own experiences, whilst not even sharing those experiences.

This isn’t an argument about when it’s ok to assume and when it isn’t. This is a case of you assuming, being corrected, and then trying to turn it in to a debate.

And to be clear, I’m not simply asking you to stop, I’m asking you to consider what happened, acknowledge you fucked up, and then stop.

If I get it wrong I’ll be gladly corrected

You did get it wrong. The OP, a femboy who posted a meme about femboys, directly told you that you had it wrong.

You’re still here arguing, and show no sign of being open to being corrected. Unless that changes soon, your time on this instance is up.

I think you mean !Help_Others@lemmy.blahaj.zone :)

They way i read it their point, it was about people being aggressive in having their pronouns being respected, even in situations where there’s clearly no malice or when their pronouns just aren’t known

Yes, that’s what she’s angry about, but it’s not why she was banned.

why don’t you just ban them for a week, and send them a message that while there might be something to their point, generalizing the heck out of it and blaiming the new generation for everything isn’t the solution either, and not the best way to approach this discussion.

Because then she just comes back and slips under the radar, and I have no way of knowing if anything is changed, unless I follow up on it. If she wants to access the instance, she can approach me and we can talk about what it will take. It’s permanent in the sense that it won’t automatically expire, not in the sense that it can’t be removed.

Maybe a bit of empathy an genuine feedback can make them a good faith contributor that has similar experiences in their life?

You are more than welcome to make that attempt and have that discussion, however, in my experience, mods and admins reaching out after bans to try and have these conversations don’t change opinions, they just further inflame the sense of injustice the person is feeling.

I don’t have the resources or will to try and manually talk around every person who throws around bigotry for what they believe are genuine reasons, nor to expose the rest of the community to gatekeeping whilst they “work through it”. And honestly, most folk who feel as strongly as she does aren’t open to being talked around in any case.

Aren’t you afraid of just creating an echo chamber where no criticism is possible at all?

In a world where we are being erased, attacked, harassed and turned in to political footballs, where every major social media platform has explicitly green lit attacks and harassment on us, concerns over “echo chambers” aren’t even on my list.

Bigotry is bigotry. It has no place here. The user in question wasn’t banned for defaulting to they/them. She was banned because she was actively blaming the victims of transphobia for the transphobia they received. She isn’t gender diverse herself, she is a cis woman who decided that the people asking for their pronouns to be respected are the real cause of the bigotry we face.

On top of that, she also threw a lot of comments that made it clear what she really things of gender diverse folk. “ attention seeking brats”. “ Younger queers need faux outrage to feel important”, “ if some chud gets all hissy about their pronouns”. “ As a cis lesbian who’s gender nonconforming, I’ve spent years putting up with their pronoun based faux “oppression” temper tantrums out of an effort to be “accepting” only to watch larger society completely flip on us”

tl;dr - a cis woman victim blaming gender diverse folk and gatekeeping them at the same time got banned.

And great that you’re similar in age survived being young and queer better, does that invalidate their experience?

No, age doesn’t invalidate alternative perspectives. That was the very point I was making. The user in question was using her age as an “elder queer” to invalidate the younger queer folk. She clearly included me in the “young queer” category in some of her coments. I pointed out my age to highlight that being an “elder queer” that has been exposed to awful shit isn’t an excuse to invalidate folks.

People didn’t so much “decide” that, as it was used that way by bigots specifically because it was historically only used for animals and objects. They used it as a slur to hurt folks in our community, and like any attempt to reclaim a slur, even though the reclamation is an act of power, there are going to be people who were targetted by the slur who struggle with the concept of reclamation.

Ah yeah. I banned her. Not because she defaults to they/them, but because she was victim blaming queer folk as the cause of their own oppression, and using a lot of thinly veiled insults against gender diverse folk

And for what it’s worth, I’m almost certainly a similar age to her

Dare I ask?

“DEI” is used by bigots as a stand in for “people who aren’t white”. So your “sort of” sarcasm comes across as racist, because no one, bigots or otherwise, means white folk when they’re talking about the importance of diversity.

Ironic racism is still racism, and your intentions don’t matter, because it reads like racism. You’re lucky you didn’t get banned tbh, and the only reason I didn’t do that is because I couldn’t be sure if you were racist, or just made a fucked up comment without realising how it would be interpreted.

The only downvotes you see on remote instances are from people on the same instance. Unless something has changed, lemmy doesn’t federate downvotes when the community is hosted on an instance with downvotes disabled (https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/pull/2128)

Ok, I’ve changed the instance setting.

That’s an instance setting. I can change it if you like

Can I get an invite to that space please

It’s definitely not ideal. There should also be a way of making a report for the mods or for the admins

Ada was banning users without telling the mods.

I was banning users from the whole instance, not specifically from 196. Instance bans doesn’t get pre-approved by community mods. Which is how every admin on every lemmy instance works, including lemmy.world.

But I had to take it down because Ada was getting upset over it

You didn’t have to take it down. What I got “upset” at isn’t that you told people you were planning on moving. It’s that you told the community you were “working with me” on your planned move. I had a single conversation with moss, in which I told her I would support her if she decided to move, and that was the last I heard of the subject, until your post.

You telling people you were thinking of moving before you moved was a good thing. You planning a move, not communicating with me about it, and then telling people you were working with me is what I took issue with.

I feel I need to clarify that. I am not saying that the 196 team didn’t moderate. What I’m saying is that because most of their moderators are based on remote instances, due to the way lemmy reports and moderation work, some of the reports fell through the “federation cracks” and didn’t get actioned remotely. And because mostly they appeared to be issues about the community rules rather than instance rules breaking, I would leave them alone. But as a result, they would regularly sit in my reports queue for a day or more, because they don’t go away until someone explicitly actions the report or closes it.

As an admin, I see all reports that cross the instance, and I have to ignore lots of them so that the community mods can deal with them and close them down, because if I close the report, the community mod might not ever see it.

My frustration with 196 is that having their reports hang around for a couple of days was a semi regular thing, which made admining more difficult, because there were always active reports in my notifications that I couldn’t close. I asked for them to put on blahaj based mods, or spin up blahaj alts, which they did, and that improved things, but because they were alts and the majority of the mods were still remote, the problem never entirely went away

tl;dr - This wasn’t a case of 196 mods not moderating. This was an issue with a lack of dedicated blahaj presence creating more workload for me.

Edit - As an aside, this issue also put a bigger spotlight on our moderation differences, because if a remote mod closed a remote report but left the post itself in place, the report on blahaj.zone would stay open, and I would have no idea if a community mod had looked at it. Which is to say, reports for content that didn’t break 196 rules, but did break blahahj.zone instance rules were more likely to come to my attention, because the report would hang around on blahaj.zone for longer. And those removals are the ones that highlighted the difference in moderation values and expectations.

I very much don’t want to get involved in day to day moderating of the community, but I do watch over all reports that come through for blahaj communities, and I will deal with the spammers/bigots etc as well.