this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
255 points (100.0% liked)
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards
1155 readers
313 users here now
This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.
Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.
Posting Guidelines
All posts should follow this basic structure:
- Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
- What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
- Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
- Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
- Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.
Rules
- Post only about bans or other sanctions that you have received from a mod or admin.
- Don’t use private communications to prove your point. We can’t verify them and they can be faked easily.
- Don’t deobfuscate mod names from the modlog with admin powers.
- Don’t harass mods or brigade comms. Don’t word your posts in a way that would trigger such harassment and brigades.
- Do not downvote posts if you think they deserved it. Use the comment votes (see below) for that.
- You can post about power trippin’ in any social media, not just lemmy. Feel free to post about reddit or a forum etc.
- If you are the accused PTB, while you are welcome to respond, please do so within the relevant post.
Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.
Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.
YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.
Some acronyms you might see.
- PTB - Power-Tripping Bastard: The commenter agrees with you this was a PTB mod.
- YDI - You Deserved It: The commenter thinks you deserved that mod action.
- YDM new - You Deserved More: The commenter thinks you got off too lightly.
- BPR - Bait-Provoked Reaction: That mod probably overreacted in charged situation, or due to being baited.
- CLM - Clueless Mod: The mod probably just doesn't understand how their software works.
Relevant comms
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
Another Jordan Lund post, another chance to remind everyone that @[email protected] is a racist and a zionist and will do whatever he can to delete pro-Palestinian posts, or posts that criticize Israel.
The #2 post on the current "top 6 hours" view is criticizing Israel. He also posted in this article offering some other sources that were more reliable that would be good for this story, and all the people complaining ignored them. Eventually one of them was reposted (somehow), and is still up. Shocker.
How does this address the fact he's a racist zionist?
It addresses the fact that you are blatantly lying. I have no idea about Jordan's underlying politics about Israel. I just know the observable facts about his moderation, that the replacement source he recommended for this story has been up for 3 hours, and the second-to-top post is something you are insisting is impossible. And you don't really care, you're just insisting that there are five lights vigorously and repeatedly. You are lying on purpose. Why?
Listen here, you little shit. He literally interviewed for an article and said he opposed BLM because they were an inconvenience to him. And I don't give a shit what he's saying now to throw off people, I've seen him say zio shit on more than one occasion, and you don't just suddenly give up being a right-wing twatwaffle.
Jordan Lund is a vile, racist, zionist piece of shit, and anyone who defends or supports him is sitting at the table with him and accepts those labels for themselves.
What a coherent and sensible response.
I guess that's probably your best option though. What else are you supposed to say? You can't exactly say the screenshot is fake, or that what it shows isn't blatantly contradictory to what you're trying to say. I guess just "listen here, you little shit" is about the best response you have available lol. I think most of the time, you'll get some hostility back in return, and then it just becomes "oh God people are yelling at each other," and the factual message gets muddled up.
I am still very curious why you (and a bunch of the other "usual suspects" accounts in these comments) are so determinedly lying about this. You clearly don't actually care about the article itself, or else you would be upvoting it, commenting under it, generally... I don't know, something. But instead you are over here, determinedly creating the fiction where Jordan Lund censored it. Why?
And here you are, just ignoring the fact Jordan is a racist piece of shit that's on record defending Israel, because he hasn't deleted one article, so clearly that is proof everyone is lying and out to get him!
It's pretty obvious to me that you're as much of a racist piece of shit as he is, if you're this hellbent on defending him. And I don't argue with people John Brown would have shot.
Tribal engagement. Nice. Pretty much anyone who's pro-Palestinian will see you saying "zionist" and whatnot, and then me disagreeing with you, and might come to the conclusion that I am on the pro-Israel side.
Also, the wild personal attacks are a pretty solid tactic. When you come out with "piece of shit", vaguely implied death threats, "vile", "twatwaffle", and whatnot, people will usually have to decide between abandoning the conversation (makes it look like you have a point), responding in kind (makes them look like an unhinged arguer-on-the-internet -- this tactic worked great on FlyingSquid), or just kind of continuing to address the subject matter and ignoring it (makes them look like a pussy for sitting there and taking it). There's not really a good option out of those for how to respond. And, whatever happens, we've abandoned the factual stuff we were talking about. Nice.
The pivot to talking suddenly about an unanswerable question (what Jordan's internal politics are) instead of the very clearly answerable one we were talking about, without any acknowledgement that we're doing that pivot, is pretty standard fare, but in keeping with the other tactics it's likely to be pretty effective. I like also how you're trying to bait me into an extended discussion about whether he is or isn't, by saying "on record," so we can start digging through messages, as if that's now the point of what we're talking about all of a sudden.
Let's see... reframing my argument in wild incorrect ways. I'm now saying "everyone" is lying (instead of just you lying, and the other people in these comments who are clearly lying, look at the screenshot). And my proof is something totally different than the screenshot I sent. My proof is all of a sudden that he didn't delete the article. Some kind of Uno reverse... because you lied about him deleting the article, and I pointed out that he didn't, now you're turning it around as being not that big a deal that he didn't delete the article after all, and it doesn't prove anything. Oh, also using "hellbent" to sort of emotionally load the conversation as me being the one who's not really being logical is a good use of spin.
Let's see... what else? You packed a ton of stuff into some pretty short messages lol. Have you ever thought about going pro?
This is as far as I got into your "well, acktually" reply. Yes, you're saying everyone. Everyone in this thread. You also implied there's this conspiracy to chase Jordan off Lemmy (I really hope there is), so we'll include the supposed actors in that plot in the Everybody as well. Don't try arguing semantics with me, your messages are right there, and you're not very good at it.
You typically do your best to post long, detailed messages where you argue semantics, try calling out logical fallacies, and generally try to act like a neutral, logic-driven intellectual. The problem is, none of your arguments are particularly compelling, and that tactic isn't convincing because humans aren't logical creatures. Everybody knows this is just a facade you're adopting to try to make your arguments seem well reasoned, and the opposing side like an overly emotional teenager. But you see, to actually make this whole act work, you have to be clever. You've got to do more than repeat bullshit you read on some debate forum.
And Phillip, you aren't very clever.
Now, we can be done here, or I can keep making fun of you while you make dry, long-winded replies and pat yourself on the back. But you might as well save your breath for now, because judging from how many shit takes you post in this comm, there will be plenty of times for me to embarrass you in the future.
Confident assertion! I knew I was missing one. You just need to show super conviction about your side.
This one is pretty rarely seen: Negging. I don't think I've seen it done on Lemmy before in exactly this way.
Stick around, I'm sure I'll show you plenty of things you've never seen before.
I have not defended Israel, I have stated multiple times that they have been committing war crimes and their current actions in Gaza meet all 5 definitions for Genocide when only 1 is needed to count as a genocide.
No, I oppose BLM for two reasons:
The protests where I live serve no purpose as everyone here agrees with them. They're preaching to the choir to make themselves feel better instead of taking the protests where it might actually matter.
They only care when the Black Life in question is taken by a white cop. 9 year old girl killed in a gang crossfire? BLM is fucking silent. Either BLM or they don't. Be honest about it.
Hear about Kaylah Love? No, of course not, because BLM doesn't give two shits about Kaylah Love.
https://abc7chicago.com/post/kaylah-love-death-loved-ones-hold-vigil-honor-16-year-old-girl-killed-east-garfield-park-chicago-police-investigating/16074414/
"What about black-on-black crime?"
Another check on my "I'm not a racist" bingo card.
Find a story where BLM is remotely interested in a death not caused by a white cop. It's cool, I'll wait.
Should they change their name to "BLM*"?
Are you fucking slow? BLM was literally created to defend black lives taken away by the police.
And rapidly became more than that... See the disruption of Bernie Sanders speech in Seattle back in the day.
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/11/9127653/bernie-sanders-black-lives-matter
Whataboutery much? You are accusing BLM about not raising issues of deaths caused by a gangwar. Guess what, they also don't raise the issue of melting polar caps. 🙄
No, but melting polar caps doesn't directly kill black people. Well, not yet, give it another 10 years.
All I'm saying is, if your mission statement is "Black Lives Matter" then it has to be ALL black lives. Not just the ones that fit your agenda.
Flip it around, ACAB - yeah, pretty much true across the board.
Because Jordan Lund said so?
You are unbelievably arrogant.
No, because words mean things. It's "Black Lives Matter", not "Black Lives Matter*"
*exclusions apply.
Nevermind 🤦
There's no walking back for you, is there? You just dig in when confronted. I like that, it's more meme-able.
And it makes for good receipts when you end up called out in this comm again next week, and I get to remind everyone how shitty you are. I gotta post these on Mastodon, they're golden.
I have nothing to apologize for because what I'm saying is 100% true. BLM doesn't give two shits about black lives unless the perp is a white cop. Full stop.
Where are the "say her name" memorials for Kaylah? They don't exist. Because they don't care.
God damn, you're on fire. You have the typical liberal racism, but you have the stubbornness of the alt-right. Lemme ask you this, how do you feel about Jews? Not Israel, I mean Jews specifically.
I have no beef with Jews, the zionists are the Jewish equivalent of white supremacists though. I've stated that multiple times.
So when you see this bullshit?
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/israel-posts-video-saying-are-no-innocent-civilians-gaza-rcna157111
That's someone who needs to be at a tribunal.
BLM was a response to cops of all races taking the lives of black people, not just white cops. Your example is of someone who was murdered, but not by the cops.
You should try reading the news more.
This is a frankly bizarre take. BLM is a protest aimed at the government (specifically the police apparatus). They already investigate gang criminality (your link specifically mentions that the Chicago PD is investigating). So as far as BLM is concerned, that's the appropriate response and the government is doing its job? What is there to protest here, it's not like gangs are going to go "oh shit look BLM is protesting, better stop all our criminal activities". You should feel sympathetic to them not protesting this, because the protest would be heard by people who already agree and by people who don't care (see your own "preaching to the choir"-argument).
BLM protests disproportionate police action usually aimed at black people, because it's not how they think the government should act, nor do they react appropriately afterwards. That's their pretty singular purpose.
Your argument boils down to a strange combination of whataboutism and a strange attempt at gatekeeping "standing up for the civil rights of minorities", which I'm not sure if I've ever seen someone else attempt tbh.
Sorry dude but that's a pretty bad take. BLM was never about gang violence. It was about systemic racism and murder of black people by police. The idea being Black Lives Matter (too) because noone was giving a fuck about the disproportionately large number of black people murdered by police without repercussion or the slightest media coverage.
Gee, because I'm neither?
As I stated in the last thread:
If you think I'm a zionist when my personal opinion is we need military intervention in Israel to force them into a two state solution, then I'm doing my job correctly.
Nobody has the balls to roll soldiers into Israel, unfortunately.
Factually anyone who believes Israel has a right to exist is a Zionist by the words definition.
That's ye olde definition and was true for decades which is why Biden said "I am a zionist". The meaning has changed greatly since Israel's war crimes became apparent.
My favorite bit on this... Following 9/11 one of Bush's arguments for invading Iraq was that Saddam Hussein was in violation of 17 or 18 UN resolutions.
At the same time, Israel was violating close to 100 due to their actions in Lebanaon, Gaza, and the West Bank. It would have been more than 100 except the US has veto power on resolutions.