this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2024
1199 points (100.0% liked)

You Should Know

39270 readers
119 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated.

If you file a report, include what specific rule is being violated and how.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

He generally shows most of the signs of the misinformation accounts:

  • Wants to repeatedly tell basically the same narrative and nothing else
  • Narrative is fundamentally false
  • Not interested in any kind of conversation or in learning that what he’s posting is backwards from the values he claims to profess

I also suspect that it’s not a coincidence that this is happening just as the Elon Musks of the world are ramping up attacks on Wikipedia, specially because it is a force for truth in the world that’s less corruptible than a lot of the others, and tends to fight back legally if someone tries to interfere with the free speech or safety of its editors.

Anyway, YSK. I reported him as misinformation, but who knows if that will lead to any result.

Edit: Number of people real salty that I’m talking about this: Lots

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 82 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 6 months ago

The last thread OP participated in features a comment from OP countering something said about Wikipedia by wikipediasuckscoop. Looks like that's who.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Doesn't LW have a rule against desinformation and asking for reliable sources since the cat vegan food affair?

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago (3 children)

It only applies to misinformation that might cause significant harm to some organism, which doesn’t apply to this.

Personally, I don’t think that LW should make the attempt to police misinformation completely, since it’s sort of a judgement call a lot of the time. I think it’s better that people be able to argue out whether something is true or false, or intended disingenuously or not, all on their own without the mods needing to decide for them, because misinformation has such a big grey area that you can’t make an objective determination and be right about it 100% of the time.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I proactively remove disinfo accounts from piefed.social. Banned.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

strongly recommend you look into Phillip's own activity: habitually stalking users, accusing them of spreading misinformation, and hiding their true intentions. his presence is toxic as fuck, and I don't trust their "analysis" one iota.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think directly accusing people of spreading misinformation, explaining why, and letting them defend themselves if they want to, is a pretty good activity to do. Mostly, I only do it when something really annoys me, like for example someone claiming a free encyclopedia project for the internet is supporting genocide, kowtowing to fascist regimes, and many of their editors are quitting because it isn't even safe to contribute to the project because they will dox you whenever asked.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

this is not the first time you have made spurious accusations of spreading misinformation. it's toxic as fuck. I wish you'd just get out of the fediverse instead of launching new instances when people start to ban your account.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ah yes, spurious. For my part, I deeply regret that I accused him of being a genocidal cult, and posted an article that was all mad about how unreasonable it was that he was was attacking ANI and other governments, like Israel and Donald Trump, to the point that a court had to sanction him for it, and then later another different article about how unreasonable it was that he was kowtowing to ANI by doing what they court-ordered him to do, after some negotiation to make sure it didn't negatively impact his allies, while wholly misrepresenting the terms of that court order and saying that "many" of his allies were abandoning him.

That would be almost as if I didn't care at all about the factual consistency of what I was saying, and was just trying to attack him with anything to hand, for whatever bizarre reasons of my own. That would be crazy, man. It would be toxic as fuck.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

it's possible he's wrong and you're still toxic. by pigeon holing him with musk you are creating a perception that has no basis in anything they've said.

you need to stop "researching" fediverse users.

just fucking stop.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What I'm accusing him is not at all just being "wrong." Anyone can be wrong, myself included. The accusation I'm making is that he simply doesn't care about the truth, and is willing to say even diametrically opposed factual statements as long as they both sound bad for Wikipedia. I think we should keep that off the network, or at least talk about it when it happens. That's not toxic. That is being interested in the truth.

What do you mean when you say "researching"? What do you mean when you say I'm pigeon holing him with Musk? I never said anything about Elon Musk at all, that I remember.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 6 months ago (2 children)

So, you don't have a reason, just "shut up shut up shut up." Okay, sounds good. If you have counterarguments that are not some kind of ad hominem, you're welcome to post them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Okay, sounds good.

your sarcasm doesn't make you seem any less toxic

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

You're being so toxic that you're projecting your toxicity onto other people. It's very toxic of you.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I don't have a counterargument at all. I'm calling out your toxic behavior.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don’t have a counterargument at all.

I'm aware.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

because I'm not interested in arguing. I'm only interested in pushing out someone who routinely badjackets other users.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago

Then put on a better jacket.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

because I'm not interested in arguing

This sounds more toxic to me, tbf

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I don't have any strong opinions on the matter, but I do have strong opinions about Phil's conduct.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

judging by how the votes seem to be panning out, people seem to think that you’re the one displaying toxic behaviour, and are kinda in favour of OP calling out and defending against genuine misinformation

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

getting snowed isn't something to brag about

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

being unwilling to change behaviour in the face of evidence that people don’t like what you’re doing isn’t something to brag about

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

I'm right, so I have no reason to change course.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

You're acting pretty toxic from what I've seen in this thread.

Have you tried cognitive behavioral therapy?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago (2 children)

So are you the same person as the linuxsucks and Wikipedia accounts?

Because that’s the vibe I’m getting from your posting.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Tbh I think that the Linux sucks guy is a different person

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

They’re the only 3 accounts trying to push that it’s brigading and needs to be shut down.

Plus they're so heavily invested into this thread to defend the accused and attack OP.

That all just seems hella sus to me.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Agreed. A lot of the things they're accusing me of overlap with things that can get me banned, and they all turned incredibly vocal about what a bum I am at about the same time. The "wikipedia sucks" guy has accused me of "stochastically" causing him to get death threats, apparently, by making this post.

They've all got a right to say all that stuff, of course, and I'm not sure it is productive to try to guess whether they are all the same person or are all saying the same bizarre things all at the same time for some other coordinated reason. I think my point has pretty much been made now, in terms of people seeing this post and being able to comment and read if they want to, at this point. I think their goal at this point is to try to push a narrative that I am "toxic as fuck" and did some various outlandish things and need to be banned or defederated, hoping that by sheer repetition it'll start to take hold.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

whether they are all the same person or are all saying the same bizarre things all at the same time for some other coordinated reason.

false dichotomy.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm not saying it has to be one or the other of those things. If I'd said "or" instead of "or are," it would be a dichotomy.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

this is nonsense.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I think their goal at this point is to try to push a narrative that I am "toxic as fuck" and did some various outlandish things and need to be banned or defederated

do you think that because it's explicitly what I've been saying?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago

Was gonna say that I didn't see madthumbs in the thread, but his comment was right at the bottom, mentioned smt about cults and protecting smt. Given that's his only comment on the thread he still seems like a separate person.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

no. but your research is about as good as philips

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Your research into the research of Phillip and this other internet stranger is toxic as fuck bro.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

having seen them repeatedly target other users, spin up new instances, and keep on doing it, I have no compunction about calling this shit out

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I hate tankies too.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago

Yes, but for evidence to the contrary, we elected Trump.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

I don’t think that LW should make the attempt to police misinformation completely, since it’s sort of a judgement call a lot of the time.

I agree, but ironically you see this reason used quite a lot of [email protected]

[email protected] has quite a few examples

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Wow. Thanks for sharing that profile... that is dedication to the niche issue of smearing Wikipedia.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Money makes the world go round

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I'm looking for a job

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago

Thanks! Blocked em