This is a rant.
It stems from the recent Joe Rogan comment about Biden which turned out to be Trump. I’m an indie-leaning “progressive” who found this to be an important moment to call out for everyone.
The video, summarized:
Joe Rogan is proved wrong when claiming Biden said “one of the problems about the Revolutionary War was that we didn’t have enough airports”. Rogan goes on, “If you had any other job, and you were talking like that, they’d go, ‘you’re done’”. “It’s just the media narrative…” Then the actual Biden video is pulled up for him showing that Biden is quoting Trump, “This is the same stable genius who said the biggest problem we had in the Revolutionary War was that we didn’t have enough airports”. “Is that fake?”, Rogan says. Producer, “It’s not fake, here’s the video…” Trump, “our army manned the airports, it ran the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do.” Rogan, “Oh, he fucked up…” His guest, “that’s the thing about the media today, you gotta look into it.”
Is there a sub for instances like this where people say something about “the other side” only to be immediately shown that it was their “side” who said it?
This post is iconic should be pinned to the top of every social site.
Soon after, I received a message from r/JusticeServed (a sub I don’t actively participate in) saying,
Hello, You have been permanently banned from participating in r/JusticeServed because you broke this community’s rules. You won’t be able to post or comment, but you can still view and subscribe to it.
Note from the moderators:
You have been banned for participating in a subreddit that has consistently shown to provide refuge for users to promote hate, violence and misinformation (joerogan).
This fully automated ban has been performed by a bot that cannot determine context. Appeals will be provided for good-faith users upon request. You can reply to this message and ask for an appeal. Any other messages will be ignored. More information on the appeal process here: https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/botbanned
My appeal did not include kind words. I called them out for being fascists and being part of the reason why Reddit has become a shithole. My appeal closed with asking not to be un-banned. Then I received this message,
We are willing to reverse the ban only if you plan to stop supporting the target subreddit. Regardless of context, contributions you provide to the target subreddit is a material form of support.
Posting, Commenting, and Voting in a subreddit or on an item is a signal to Reddit and their advertisers that the participant believes that the community or comment or post has a legitimate reason for existing and serves a purpose for them.
There is no place for hate, violence and purposeful disinformation on Reddit. Those sub’s advertisers should not be rewarded for the traffic metrics you and your peers provide to them by showing up and inflating those numbers.
They don’t care what you say. They are just happy to have you continue to show up and refresh the page.
If this is something you can accept, to stop participating in the target subreddit, then please reply. If the bot hits you again for the same subreddit, you will not be unbanned a second time.
If you don’t want to stop helping the target sub and their advertisers, then you can just ignore this message.
I responded, in part, with a full throated ‘you can go fuck yourself’. This lead to a harassment warning from Reddit. I also noted the sub’s ‘motto’ - “Too many times justice fails to prevail. These are not those times.” For fucking real. I had also pointed out that what they’re doing is analogous to DeSantis banning me from entering Florida just because I live in Philadelphia.
Dear JusticeServed, this is called cutting off your nose to spite your face.
I mean, this is the kind of shit that makes people more sympathetic to Musk and Rogan. I am not in support of nationalism or racism or misinformation. What I am in support of is common fucking sense.
It’s very likely that had I maintained my composure I would have had a successful appeal. I didn’t want to appeal to be unbanned though, I wanted to bring attention to their hypocrisy.
With the overturning of Roe v Wade, we saw a couple of subreddits pinning mod endorsed celebration threads. Why anyone would want to celebrate people losing rights is beyond me.
Rights? What rights are you supporting, JusticeServed? Certainly not Freedom of Speech. Spying on people and censoring them for actions they take in other communities sounds a lot like fascism to me.
The take away here is that we shouldn’t put so much emotional weight on stupid shit like this that ultimately doesn’t matter in our real lives. And in our real lives, we should be more cautious with judging people. Your current mood and state of mind can easily cause you to misinterpret someone else’s words and (re)actions. We should all be more mindful to take a breath before reacting to something emotionally triggering. And, of course, fuck Reddit.
It’s a common way of preventing a lot of harassment in some subs, and it’s done by a bot most of the time. For example back in the the day posting in T_D meant a ban in some of the trans subs I was in. The point was that if you’re posting in T_D, then the chances of you coming into a forum for trans folks to harass them was pretty high. It was easier and safer to just ban those folks outright before they began messing with people.
This specific situation makes some sense or in cases where brigading actually happened and it was a tool to stem it…I think nowadays that isn’t the case anymore and OP’s is an example of advocacy going little too far. Like if you listen Spotify you can’t come to my house for Christmas dinner because by doing so you promote Joe Rogan and not paying artists … and that is against my values. Really?
Brigading 100% still happens. I’ve seen it here on Lemmy just in the past few months.
Also, I have absolutely banned people from coming to my house for Christmas dinner. It started as relatives that have decided that their political beliefs extend into my bedroom, and can’t seem to keep their damn mouth shut about it. But now it’s a “if you are a regular Fox News viewer you are not welcome in my house for dinner” policy because over the past several years I’ve noticed that every single person who meets that criteria has had the same issue. Could there be a person out there who is a Fox News watcher and can keep their mouth shut? Sure. But I’m not willing to risk my own mental health for the sake of “being inclusive”.
I get it, but… This also prevents people from speaking in opposition to that group. Because if you dare speak against them, you’re punished by the same group you’re trying to speak on behalf of.
Yea, that’s the idea. I don’t care what opinion you have about the legitimacy of trans people in a sub meant for trans people to support each other. Not every sub is meant to be a place for “free debate”. In fact, there are some places where debate is not appropriate or welcome. Like you wouldn’t walk into an AA meeting and try to debate the health benefits of wine.
Especially places that are meant to be safe spaces for marginalized groups, this is really important.
Come on now. There are no legit health benefits to wine. A better example would be arguing the health benefits of not drinking wine in a wine sub. And I think that would be a valid contribution. Although, still not an analogue to the topic here. You’re taking about science when we’re discussing social and cultural norms that have changed over time. Places like T_D should be open to others to come in and offer differing opinions. As should whatever far left leaning subs exist.
Fram what I can tell, the Rogan sub seems to be both pro and anti Rogan. Seems likes a generally open space for discussion. As much as I think the guy is as dumb as a pound of butter, he promotes the idea of free thought. Unfortunately, free thought means stupid people gravitate towards stupid ideas. Which is why I’ve said earlier that the ‘why’ is more important than the tangible results.
You just told them a “better example” than the one they made, because the example you told them was “better” was one you could disagree with, and that shit was transparent as hell.
You talk about wanting free debate but you used an actual strawman.