Did you even look at their post histories or just add the first people to volunteer?
One of them is running around this sub right now arguing for the dismantling of public education because they didn't enjoy highschool
Edit:
The top mod started pming me...
Apparently he just accepted the only people who said they wouldn't remove disinformation because that would primarily effect "the right"
Only two did and we chose them, wish we had more not trying to censor the right since some were saying “I’ll remove disinformation and etc.” Which violates one of our policy in giving the right a voice since look disinformation may be bad, but removing them is censorship and our goal is not to reform that echo chamber that was r/politics
I will say, I haven't seen a moderation level action yet that seems horribly wrong, but I feel like that's only going to be a matter of time
^^1 Paraphrased, not a direct quote
e; I apparently can't figure out superscript text
The Charlottesville people are largely fascists, but they also don't have that much influence in American politics. Dobbs is not a fascist position. I personally support abortion access- but there is nothing in the Constitution to protect it. As for state laws persecuting trans people I actually have looked that much into what's passed, I've just seen rhetoric. Can you point me to some of the laws that're chrisofascist?
If you have a table of 10 people, and a Nazi sits down and joins them without them kicking him out, you now have a table with 11 Nazis at it.
Chomsky has some great takes on certain topics. He’s phenomenal at linguistics, and his analysis of propaganda systems in the US is paralleled only by Parenti. Unfortunately, he also holds some contradictory viewpoints to what he espouses. You cannot tolerate intolerance. Period. Having a different view is not the same as being a Nazi. It’s not merely a difference of opinion. Your right to free speech stops where my face begins. You don’t have the right to advocate for my murder, as they did in Charlottesville, and accepting that as an opinion would mean inherently abandoning the belief that human rights are universal.
I disagree. You can oppose a murder without murdering them. In the same way, those who oppose certain rights of others must be opposed but not persecuted, not only because they'd become a martyr- but because even though I strongly disagree their beliefs and in my opinion are clearly wrong that doesn't exactly matter to whether I can talk to them about programming over lunch.
Your right to free speech stops where my face begins.
What does this mean?
and accepting that as an opinion would mean inherently abandoning the belief that human rights are universal.
An opinion can be disgusting and abhorrent and still be an any opinion. Nazism clearly is an opinion- an abhorrent opinion that rejects human life and human rights, yet still an opinion. Just like someone can have an opinion that murdering as many people as possible is good.
Nazism clearly is an opinion- an abhorrent opinion that rejects human life and human rights, yet still an opinion. Just like someone can have an opinion that murdering as many people as possible is good.
If nazis are welcome in a community, no one else is.
What should be done to a nazi if they're living in your city/area/country?
It should be made perfectly clear to nazis that they are not welcome.
What should happen to a nazi if they post on this community?
It should be made perfectly clear to nazis that they are not welcome.
Unwelcome how? If someone associates with them do they become Nazis by association?
What should happen to a nazi if they post on this community?
It depends what they post, just like with anyone else.
They were all fascists, and everything else you said is, at best, so deeply ignorant that I don't think I've got the time or mental energy to point out how dumb and dangerous this refusal to see what should be obvious to everyone is. I strongly encourage you to step down as a moderator of this community and strongly encourage anyone who approved your being made a mod to do the same.
How is he ignorant
They were all fascists
Every single one there? I do not think you could possibly know that.
dumb and dangerous this refusal to see what should be obvious to everyone is.
Ironically what I said in my mod application is:
"I fully accept that people can and do hold opposing opinions to me, yet might be smarter, more informed, or more moral than me. I may still disagree with them but being wrong isn't evil."
Do you think I(or anyone) could disagree with you on anything without you automatically assuming they are less informed, stupider, or evil?
Every single one there? I do not think you could possibly know that.
The counterprotesters weren't. If you're marching and nazis show up to march with you and you don't drive them off or leave yourself, you're ok marching with nazis. The term for someone who is ok marching with nazis is "a nazi."
So the German Communist Party were Nazis?
After the Nazi electoral breakthrough in the 1930 Reichstag election, the SPD proposed a renewed united front with the KPD against fascism but this was rejected.[25]
In the early 1930s, the KPD cooperated with the Nazis in attacking the social democrats, and both sought to destroy the liberal democracy of the Weimar Republic.[26] They also followed an increasingly nationalist course, trying to appeal to nationalist-leaning workers.[4][27]
In 1931, the party reported a membership of 200,000.[28]
The KPD leadership initially first criticised but then supported the 1931 Prussian Landtag referendum, an unsuccessful attempt launched by the far-right Stahlhelm to bring down the social democrat state government of Prussia by means of a plebiscite; the KPD referred to the SA as "working people's comrades" during this campaign.[29]
In this period, while also opposed to the Nazis, the KPD regarded the Nazi Party as a less sophisticated and thus less dangerous fascist party than the SPD, and KPD leader Ernst Thälmann declared that "some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest [of social democrats]".[30] In February 1932, Thälmann argued that “Hitler must come to power first, then the requirements for a revolutionary crisis [will] arrive more quickly”. In November 1932, the KPD and the Nazis worked together in the Berlin transport workers’ strike.
Wow. Neat pro-nazi talking points. Do you think this is a good look for the moderation team?
I'd say the German Communist Party didn't know any better and learned the hard way what happens when you welcome nazis. It's interesting how none of your examples are from after 1932. I wonder what could have happened in 1933 that caused the sudden cutoff.
Neat pro-nazi talking points.
How is that pro-nazi? My personal ideology is essentially in opposition to Nazi ideology in every possible matter.
I'd say the German Communist Party didn't know any better
Not what I asked. You said marching with Nazis automatically makes you a Nazi, regardless of if they kill you later or not. So were they Nazis or not.
It's interesting how none of your examples are from after 1932.
Interesting how you didn't answer, were they Nazis?
My personal ideology is essentially in opposition to Nazi ideology in every possible matter.
Essentially? Wow, you can't even pretend to oppose nazis without wormy equivocation.
Not what I asked. You said marching with Nazis automatically makes you a Nazi, regardless of if they kill you later or not. So were they Nazis or not.
In this day and age it is. Certainly in the context of the unite the right nazi rally it is, which is what we were talking about. I can't fault fools who didn't know any better. Everyone knows they're the baddies now. Everyone at that rally knew exactly what they were about.
Interesting how you didn’t answer, were they Nazis?
The nazis didn't seem to think so, since they built Dachau to kill them. But yeah, have your stupid little gotcha. You're so clever.
headpats.
Essentially? Wow, you can't even pretend to oppose nazis without wormy equivocation.
Yeah because I think even Nazis would agree with me that random murder should be a crime or at least some people should have access to clean drinking water. I assume you agree with that too.
I can't fault fools who didn't know any better. Everyone knows they're the baddies now. Everyone at that rally knew exactly what they were about.
I think you overestimate how many people are obsessed with internet politics.
The nazis didn't seem to think so, since they built Dachau to kill them.
I didn't ask if they thought so I asked if you did.
Also, stop being patronizing, it's not funny it's just rude.
The Charlottesville people are largely fascists, but they also don’t have that much influence in American politics.
The president at the time called them "very fine people" because he was scared of alienating them.
I think he more likely believed there were some non-nazis in the group seeing as he in the same quote said I condemn neo-nazis and white supremacists dozens of times
In case anyone needed to know where c/politics' moderation team is coming from.
I mean, none of us can speak to what someone else believes. I don't think Trump puts that much thought into what he says to intentionally not say something to avoid alienating voters.
The constitution itself protects it. It's called penumbral reasoning.
The idea that we set up a limited government that could also come into people's homes and legislate family planning decisions is absurd to the point of stupidity.
I agree there an many unenumerated rights, but I understand the argument that there is nothing indicating that the is any more protected than bodily autonomy when it comes to drugs, or how you raise your children, etc. But, I am of the belief that drug use and abortion could definitely be considered protected rights. I just understand the perspective of those who disagree.
Yeah I guess. I've only been able to get internships- good internships. But I've never been able to get a real job
Maybe I misinterpreted that.
What's with all the comments about closing public schools and calling clearly fascist movements as "christian moralists".
I see you are a @aidan fan. Here is the thing, we all will have different interpretations of political viewpoints. This isn't a open forum for only progressives, conservatives, liberals, moderates, or whatever, it is a shared forum open to different perspectives. You don't have to agree or disagree with anyone's points, but we are one community and everyone's voice can be heard (as long as it doesn't violate the rules or lemmy.world TOS). That is why having aiden is a great asset to the team. Moderators are rarely liked, but we value his commitment to growing the community and providing insight and perspective.
Exactly what I wanted to hear.
I hope this place stays open-minded and free to discuss different viewpoints. Even if I don't agree with certain views of one member of the mod team, I'm ok with that. As long as it doesn't influence who can post their opinion.
Thanks for your comment and..
well, we'll see in the future.
Currently working a good internship. Also, talk about stalking!
Edit: I also never advocated closing public schools. I advocated making them voluntary.
Edit 2: I have also been offered a few jobs but are not feasible for me since I want to live near my partner.
I wouldn't consider it stalking but a background-check.
This community could (/will) become the biggest political forum on the web. Wouldn't you want to know who moderates it?
You can go through my post history, nothing to hide. I don't consider it stalking but a feature.
We will follow your journey with great interest.
I wouldn’t consider it stalking but a background-check.
And why does dissent automatically fail the background check in your book?
Of course you're free to, it's just I'd argue a rude thing to do to instead of judging someones actions you criticized them for being vulnerable in a completely different context days ago.
I mean how else people's gonna know who has the moral high ground am I rite
It's a traditional right wing position to defund public schools.
Right now :
'House Republicans want to cut Title I funding by 80%'
If you don't know, title 1 funding is money for the poorest public schools. The money is often used for nutrition programs, resource educators, special education teachers and Education assistants.
I think you might be too young and inexperienced to be an unbiased moderator.
It's a traditional right wing position to defund public schools.
Largely yes.
I think you might be too young and inexperienced to be an unbiased moderator.
Judge based on action, you very clearly broke rule 3 to insult me because I disagreed with you on this exact issue. You then said I should be removed from being a moderator, not because of an action but because I disagreed on this issue. I'm sorry idk what to tell you other than watch the modlogs.
Fucking ban me then
No, we don't ban for rule 3 violations unless its multiple times repeated.
Fair enough, there's still a lot of weird little details to get ironed out, and we do at least have a modlog (which is a big advantage over reddit)
Thanks for the reply and that link
Yeah, I will look at it and see if I can fix it myself. And definitely the modlog is a big advantage.
One of them is running around this sub right now arguing for the dismantling of public education because they didn’t enjoy highschool
There's a bit more to it than that, but yeah. The part you missed though is that I never advocated dismantling it- I advocated it being voluntary.
Oof. I'd consider turning down the mod offer and getting a little life experience first if I were you.
At what level of experience would you accept my opposition?
I'd give it another 10 years or so. I'm not trying to belittle you, but thinking back to how I was at 20, I would've done a poor job. Maybe you're more mature than I was at that age but some of your comments suggest otherwise. Good luck.
I think maturity is very contextual. And depends how you define maturity. My profesional life has been fairly mature, whereas my attachment to others isn't as much. But, I honestly, don't understand your intention in saying that other than to belittle or dismiss. Also, so I can learn can you point out where I was immature- and how I could've improved me response?
Maturity is an expression of experience and at 20 you have a limited amount of experience. For example you're still very close in terms of years to your schooldays and your experience of that leads to you calling school "false imprisonment" which is a terribly immature take imo.
I mean, there are plenty of much older people who have spent much more time in schools than me who have same conclusion. Deschooling/Unschooling is an existing philosophy, you don't have to think it's credible, but it's not like only some random 20 year olds and younger believe in it.
20 you have a limited amount of experience.
Of course, but I also likely have very different experiences than you, so I think I could more aptly speak to my own experiences.
It's an impossible question to answer but do you think your views on education would be different had you had a better experience in school?
I think not, because there were plenty of times I did have traditionally good teachers, and kind teachers. Most teachers of course want the best for their students. But that form of education just wasn't effective for me, despite performing well it made me miserable and all the things useful to me in life I taught myself or had to reteach myself as I had forgotten since school. (A problem Caleb Gattegno talked about- how schools teach lack genuine interest and value to the student so of course they forget it. I've actually noticed my memory has been significantly better since being out of school, but that could just be placebo or confirmation bias.)
Here is the context.
If we go private schools I will fully be unable to afford to live with my family in this country. If I start seeing this pushed for I am burning down private schools in the dead of night. They want us broke and dead and to have no choice. Society is supposed to help people live easier. This is absolute bullshit and nefarious.
User adien: 'Private in this context means charter, which is still state funded. Furthermore with more market share there would be enough demand for affordable private schools, as seen in India where government schools are infamous.'
Yes, I presented what private school meant in this context?
More market share, means more charter schools. You've already explained yourself well enough. According to you 4th graders should just go to work and they're ready to make decisions affecting their future because you hated your experience in school.
Actually you should blame your state, I assume Nevada, for forcing you to stay in school to the age of 18 instead of the public school you wish to replace with charter schools. Why didn't your parents take you out and homeschool you anyway? Why don't you blame them half as much as you blame the cruel teachers.
More market share, means more charter schools.
No, when I talked about increased market competition I didn't mean charter schools. I imagine the government would have a fixed rate per student for charter schools. I was talking about prices could go down in parent paid private schools.
According to you 4th graders should just go to work
I said if the intention of school is to provide basic knowledge and if a child can demonstrate basic knowledge then they should be allowed to leave schooling.
they’re ready to make decisions affecting their future because you hated your experience in school.
You are starting to sound a little transphobic- but regardless, a child better knows what they want than a legislature who has never met them.
Actually you should blame your state, I assume Nevada,
Incorrect, why do you assume Nevada? And, I do blame the state government- hence why I want to change the law, which currently has significant influence from the teacher's union which I suspect had something to do with the law being passed.
public school you wish to replace with charter schools.
I never advocated abolishing all public schools, I don't think I even explicitly said charter schools were better. I personally am not sure, I think a different model for schooling completely is better. I was just disagreeing with fearmongering about them.
Why didn’t your parents take you out and homeschool you anyway?
They had jobs? And, the state regulations for homeschooling still placed a burden.
Why don’t you blame them half as much as you blame the cruel teachers.
I don't blame individual teachers, I blame the law- and the people who continue to advocate enforcing it.
I can't imagine a more contentious, biased moderator.
You blame the state for not funding more charter schools, which is a convoluted way of saying defund public schools.
You blame your parents for not homeschooling you, because they had to work. You yourself would rather just work. Think about it a little. Would you be able to pull your kids out of school, homeschool them if you are busy working? Or would you send your kids directly to work at the age of 10? Would you like the state to rewrite child labor laws?
You blame the state legislators? This is the first time in our serval day long conversation that you mentioned legislators. You previously solely mentioned teachers, your school ect.
Perhaps you should petition your legislators instead of pointlessly arguing with random internet strangers.
I am a public school teacher. I am an educator. My job is helping young children gain life skills in the hope that they will be successful in life. I am only interested in solutions to problems. I don't see how any of your suggestions lead towards solutions.
Go try to make a positive contribution. You are just complaining that your experience in highschool sucked. 'Things should be different.' That's all I've heard from you.
How are you going to make things different? Will it be better for all of us or does your solution only benefit your circumstances?
I can't imagine a more contentious, biased moderator.
I can think of at least one, XD.
Cause and effect doesn't imply guilt. I am extremely privileged to have the parents I have.
Perhaps you should petition your legislators instead of pointlessly arguing with random internet strangers.
Sorry, but that's exactly why this community exists, not necessarily only for pointless argument but for pointless discussion too. You are engaging in it just as much as me- and calling me biased for having an opinion you disagree with. Everyone is biased, including you, the issue is when bias influences decision making- check the modlogs and call it out if it does.
I am only interested in solutions to problems.
You and most people reject it is a problem, I am advocating it is.
Go try to make a positive contribution. You are just complaining that your experience in highschool sucked. 'Things should be different.' That's all I've heard from you.
How are you going to make things different? Will it be better for all of us or does your solution only benefit your circumstances?
I have a lot of problems with a lot of things. I am not virtuous enough to dedicate my life to solving all of them. I can still complain about them on the internet just as you do.
Thanks for the report, and it doesn't seem any noteworthy that would affect his status as moderator. If he does something like using his powers or status then I'll take action against him.
Thanks for not answering my question:
Did you even look at their post histories or just add the first people to volunteer?
While I'm not sure if you're accurately portraying their position (i havent seen this myself), you have a point with this question that I'd also like an answer to.
There's also claiming Hunter Biden's cocaine was found in the White House, and pretend ignorance that christofascism is even a thing, and just in general defending anything shitty republican do or say.
There's lots of other /politics on Lemmy tho, so it's not as bad as when this happened on reddit. Plenty of options besides this one.
pretend ignorance that christofascism is even a thing
That sort of duplicity is not something anyone should want in a mod. I've seen mods on reddit pretend that a guy literally spouting nazi slogans was just fine because he translated them into English first.
Hate speech, slurs, and abusive language are banned under rule 6. I'm not intending to set any rules, but I will enforce them.
I suppose we'll see how that shakes out in reality. You're already aware that I and others have doubts.
It's good to be skeptical of anyone who could censor important and controversial topics.
Do you have one in particular you recommend? This one feels like it's going downhill the past two days.
What a dumb ass.
There’s also claiming Hunter Biden’s cocaine was found in the White House
No. I said that is the argument of some republicans.
and pretend ignorance that christofascism is even a thing
No, I was wondering how the user I was replying to defined it- because from online discussions I've been on in the past everyone defines fascism differently.
Well, now's your chance to set the record straight and clear things up by confronting the issues directly:
Is it your belief that Hunter Biden’s cocaine was found in the White House?
Is christofascism a thing?
Is it your belief that Hunter Biden’s cocaine was found in the White House?
No probably not, I haven't looked into it too much- but I saw people on here saying it was in the tourist area.
Is christofascism a thing?
Fascism can enforce an interpretation of Christianity- yes.
Fascism can enforce an interpretation of Christianity- yes.
Do you believe that christofascist ideology holds influence in American politics?
I think nearly every ideology has some influence in American politics, as for significant influence not really(anymore, historically yes). I do think there is significant influence from Christian moralists but not exactly fascists.
You don't do direct answers, do you?
Life has nuance. I'm not going to give a matter-of-fact answer if I'm not 100% certain, I will acknowledge nuances.
Might be wise to add an age and education attainment requirement to be a moderator. I'm probably in the minority here but I appreciated the mods at r/politics. Mind you I've been temporarily-banned a few times from that sub, justifiably so (usually for stooping to the level of the uncivil). They were generally fair and didn't seem to exploit their positions from what I experienced in ten years there.
It's just too ironic that people left reddit because spez didn't understand how hard modding is...
And Lemmy is full of communities were the mods have no idea what they're doing, they just signed up a couple days earlier than everyone else.
Especially without established mod tools/bots like reddit had. It's going to be a shitshow.
How would education attainment be verified- and how could that seen as anything but alienating the working class. Also, what would be a good minimum age*?
Say, at least a PhD to post on here and minimum of 18 years old, maximum 32
True, I will talk to other mods about adding mandatory ID checking and notarized doctorate verification(probably by mail). /s
So, I won't admit to anyone else but aidan, but I looked at aidans and he seemed fine, while his opinion on schooling I may not agree with at all, doesn't mean it should affect his status as to be moderator, as both of us agreed, he was part of our 2 pick we need.
So, I won’t admit to anyone else but aidan, but I looked at aidans and he seemed fine
That's the problem...
You look at that kid's account history and think there isnt an issue.
It doesn't make anyone think better of him, it made us all realize you're likely just as bad.
Exactly. It's a wake up call that it's time to find a new politics sub.
Did you even look at their post histories or just add the first people to volunteer?
One of them is running around this sub right now arguing for the dismantling of public education because they didn't enjoy highschool
Edit:
The top mod started pming me...
Apparently he just accepted the only people who said they wouldn't remove disinformation because that would primarily effect "the right"
https://i.imgur.com/0Maach1.jpg
This community is fucked.
No one is going to become a mod here unless they agree to let people spread propaganda...
20 years old, no job, far right and emotional unstable. I think we got the perfect candidate!
Although, I am curious what gave you that impression? Same with the emotionally unstable part.
I mean you have different opinions and thought processes then the mainstream man, it doesn't need much more than that
I wonder how reflective online forums are of the mainstream- also
I'm not far-right. I have a job.
"They're not christofascists, they're Christian moralists" ^^1 is a disturbingly far right position post Charlottesville, Dobbs, and all the state laws persecuting trans people that have been passed recently.
I will say, I haven't seen a moderation level action yet that seems horribly wrong, but I feel like that's only going to be a matter of time
^^1 Paraphrased, not a direct quote
e; I apparently can't figure out superscript text
The Charlottesville people are largely fascists, but they also don't have that much influence in American politics. Dobbs is not a fascist position. I personally support abortion access- but there is nothing in the Constitution to protect it. As for state laws persecuting trans people I actually have looked that much into what's passed, I've just seen rhetoric. Can you point me to some of the laws that're chrisofascist?
If you have a table of 10 people, and a Nazi sits down and joins them without them kicking him out, you now have a table with 11 Nazis at it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-oV42OMQoE
Chomsky has some great takes on certain topics. He’s phenomenal at linguistics, and his analysis of propaganda systems in the US is paralleled only by Parenti. Unfortunately, he also holds some contradictory viewpoints to what he espouses. You cannot tolerate intolerance. Period. Having a different view is not the same as being a Nazi. It’s not merely a difference of opinion. Your right to free speech stops where my face begins. You don’t have the right to advocate for my murder, as they did in Charlottesville, and accepting that as an opinion would mean inherently abandoning the belief that human rights are universal.
I disagree. You can oppose a murder without murdering them. In the same way, those who oppose certain rights of others must be opposed but not persecuted, not only because they'd become a martyr- but because even though I strongly disagree their beliefs and in my opinion are clearly wrong that doesn't exactly matter to whether I can talk to them about programming over lunch.
What does this mean?
An opinion can be disgusting and abhorrent and still be an any opinion. Nazism clearly is an opinion- an abhorrent opinion that rejects human life and human rights, yet still an opinion. Just like someone can have an opinion that murdering as many people as possible is good.
If nazis are welcome in a community, no one else is.
What should be done to a nazi if they're living in your city/area/country?
It should be made perfectly clear to nazis that they are not welcome.
What should happen to a nazi if they post on this community?
Unwelcome how? If someone associates with them do they become Nazis by association?
It depends what they post, just like with anyone else.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=4-oV42OMQoE
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
They were all fascists, and everything else you said is, at best, so deeply ignorant that I don't think I've got the time or mental energy to point out how dumb and dangerous this refusal to see what should be obvious to everyone is. I strongly encourage you to step down as a moderator of this community and strongly encourage anyone who approved your being made a mod to do the same.
How is he ignorant
Every single one there? I do not think you could possibly know that.
Ironically what I said in my mod application is:
"I fully accept that people can and do hold opposing opinions to me, yet might be smarter, more informed, or more moral than me. I may still disagree with them but being wrong isn't evil."
Do you think I(or anyone) could disagree with you on anything without you automatically assuming they are less informed, stupider, or evil?
The counterprotesters weren't. If you're marching and nazis show up to march with you and you don't drive them off or leave yourself, you're ok marching with nazis. The term for someone who is ok marching with nazis is "a nazi."
So the German Communist Party were Nazis?
Wow. Neat pro-nazi talking points. Do you think this is a good look for the moderation team?
I'd say the German Communist Party didn't know any better and learned the hard way what happens when you welcome nazis. It's interesting how none of your examples are from after 1932. I wonder what could have happened in 1933 that caused the sudden cutoff.
How is that pro-nazi? My personal ideology is essentially in opposition to Nazi ideology in every possible matter.
Not what I asked. You said marching with Nazis automatically makes you a Nazi, regardless of if they kill you later or not. So were they Nazis or not.
Interesting how you didn't answer, were they Nazis?
Essentially? Wow, you can't even pretend to oppose nazis without wormy equivocation.
In this day and age it is. Certainly in the context of the unite the right nazi rally it is, which is what we were talking about. I can't fault fools who didn't know any better. Everyone knows they're the baddies now. Everyone at that rally knew exactly what they were about.
The nazis didn't seem to think so, since they built Dachau to kill them. But yeah, have your stupid little gotcha. You're so clever.
headpats.
Yeah because I think even Nazis would agree with me that random murder should be a crime or at least some people should have access to clean drinking water. I assume you agree with that too.
I think you overestimate how many people are obsessed with internet politics.
I didn't ask if they thought so I asked if you did.
Also, stop being patronizing, it's not funny it's just rude.
The president at the time called them "very fine people" because he was scared of alienating them.
I think he more likely believed there were some non-nazis in the group seeing as he in the same quote said I condemn neo-nazis and white supremacists dozens of times
In case anyone needed to know where c/politics' moderation team is coming from.
I mean, none of us can speak to what someone else believes. I don't think Trump puts that much thought into what he says to intentionally not say something to avoid alienating voters.
The constitution itself protects it. It's called penumbral reasoning.
The idea that we set up a limited government that could also come into people's homes and legislate family planning decisions is absurd to the point of stupidity.
I agree there an many unenumerated rights, but I understand the argument that there is nothing indicating that the is any more protected than bodily autonomy when it comes to drugs, or how you raise your children, etc. But, I am of the belief that drug use and abortion could definitely be considered protected rights. I just understand the perspective of those who disagree.
https://lemmy.world/comment/1093566
Maybe I misinterpreted that.
What's with all the comments about closing public schools and calling clearly fascist movements as "christian moralists".
I see you are a @aidan fan. Here is the thing, we all will have different interpretations of political viewpoints. This isn't a open forum for only progressives, conservatives, liberals, moderates, or whatever, it is a shared forum open to different perspectives. You don't have to agree or disagree with anyone's points, but we are one community and everyone's voice can be heard (as long as it doesn't violate the rules or lemmy.world TOS). That is why having aiden is a great asset to the team. Moderators are rarely liked, but we value his commitment to growing the community and providing insight and perspective.
Exactly what I wanted to hear.
I hope this place stays open-minded and free to discuss different viewpoints. Even if I don't agree with certain views of one member of the mod team, I'm ok with that. As long as it doesn't influence who can post their opinion.
Thanks for your comment and..
well, we'll see in the future.
Currently working a good internship. Also, talk about stalking!
Edit: I also never advocated closing public schools. I advocated making them voluntary.
Edit 2: I have also been offered a few jobs but are not feasible for me since I want to live near my partner.
I wouldn't consider it stalking but a background-check.
This community could (/will) become the biggest political forum on the web. Wouldn't you want to know who moderates it?
You can go through my post history, nothing to hide. I don't consider it stalking but a feature.
We will follow your journey with great interest.
And why does dissent automatically fail the background check in your book?
Of course you're free to, it's just I'd argue a rude thing to do to instead of judging someones actions you criticized them for being vulnerable in a completely different context days ago.
I mean how else people's gonna know who has the moral high ground am I rite
It's a traditional right wing position to defund public schools. Right now : 'House Republicans want to cut Title I funding by 80%'
If you don't know, title 1 funding is money for the poorest public schools. The money is often used for nutrition programs, resource educators, special education teachers and Education assistants.
I think you might be too young and inexperienced to be an unbiased moderator.
Largely yes.
Judge based on action, you very clearly broke rule 3 to insult me because I disagreed with you on this exact issue. You then said I should be removed from being a moderator, not because of an action but because I disagreed on this issue. I'm sorry idk what to tell you other than watch the modlogs.
Fucking ban me then
No, we don't ban for rule 3 violations unless its multiple times repeated.
Based
thank you for pointing this out. guess i'll be unsubscribing and looking for another politics community to join.
So business as usual lmao
No, it's worse...
The top mode just pm'ed me saying he only accepted people who said they wouldn't remove disinformation.
Because that would mean more conservative comments got removed, and apparently that's biased and not what this sub is for.
Since misinformation is allowed, well, Lemmygrad is right there and I'm certain there's some choice tankie misinfo.
You can just block the people posting things you don't want to see.
Just like with reddit.
Also, one thing that's great about lemmy is the public modlog- I think its valuable for a community to be able see mod abuse and call it out.
Is there something glitchy going on or is this community's modlog supposed to just say "mod" did everything?
Oh oops, I had assumed it showed individual mod names to non-mods as it does to mods. It's interesting because the public api actually does say the mod names So, its either a bug in the web API or in the backend.
Fair enough, there's still a lot of weird little details to get ironed out, and we do at least have a modlog (which is a big advantage over reddit)
Thanks for the reply and that link
Yeah, I will look at it and see if I can fix it myself. And definitely the modlog is a big advantage.
There's a bit more to it than that, but yeah. The part you missed though is that I never advocated dismantling it- I advocated it being voluntary.
Oof. I'd consider turning down the mod offer and getting a little life experience first if I were you.
At what level of experience would you accept my opposition?
I'd give it another 10 years or so. I'm not trying to belittle you, but thinking back to how I was at 20, I would've done a poor job. Maybe you're more mature than I was at that age but some of your comments suggest otherwise. Good luck.
I think maturity is very contextual. And depends how you define maturity. My profesional life has been fairly mature, whereas my attachment to others isn't as much. But, I honestly, don't understand your intention in saying that other than to belittle or dismiss. Also, so I can learn can you point out where I was immature- and how I could've improved me response?
Maturity is an expression of experience and at 20 you have a limited amount of experience. For example you're still very close in terms of years to your schooldays and your experience of that leads to you calling school "false imprisonment" which is a terribly immature take imo.
I mean, there are plenty of much older people who have spent much more time in schools than me who have same conclusion. Deschooling/Unschooling is an existing philosophy, you don't have to think it's credible, but it's not like only some random 20 year olds and younger believe in it.
Of course, but I also likely have very different experiences than you, so I think I could more aptly speak to my own experiences.
It's an impossible question to answer but do you think your views on education would be different had you had a better experience in school?
I think not, because there were plenty of times I did have traditionally good teachers, and kind teachers. Most teachers of course want the best for their students. But that form of education just wasn't effective for me, despite performing well it made me miserable and all the things useful to me in life I taught myself or had to reteach myself as I had forgotten since school. (A problem Caleb Gattegno talked about- how schools teach lack genuine interest and value to the student so of course they forget it. I've actually noticed my memory has been significantly better since being out of school, but that could just be placebo or confirmation bias.)
Here is the context.
User adien: 'Private in this context means charter, which is still state funded. Furthermore with more market share there would be enough demand for affordable private schools, as seen in India where government schools are infamous.'
Yes, I presented what private school meant in this context?
More market share, means more charter schools. You've already explained yourself well enough. According to you 4th graders should just go to work and they're ready to make decisions affecting their future because you hated your experience in school.
Actually you should blame your state, I assume Nevada, for forcing you to stay in school to the age of 18 instead of the public school you wish to replace with charter schools. Why didn't your parents take you out and homeschool you anyway? Why don't you blame them half as much as you blame the cruel teachers.
No, when I talked about increased market competition I didn't mean charter schools. I imagine the government would have a fixed rate per student for charter schools. I was talking about prices could go down in parent paid private schools.
I said if the intention of school is to provide basic knowledge and if a child can demonstrate basic knowledge then they should be allowed to leave schooling.
You are starting to sound a little transphobic- but regardless, a child better knows what they want than a legislature who has never met them.
Incorrect, why do you assume Nevada? And, I do blame the state government- hence why I want to change the law, which currently has significant influence from the teacher's union which I suspect had something to do with the law being passed.
I never advocated abolishing all public schools, I don't think I even explicitly said charter schools were better. I personally am not sure, I think a different model for schooling completely is better. I was just disagreeing with fearmongering about them.
They had jobs? And, the state regulations for homeschooling still placed a burden.
I don't blame individual teachers, I blame the law- and the people who continue to advocate enforcing it.
I can't imagine a more contentious, biased moderator.
You blame the state for not funding more charter schools, which is a convoluted way of saying defund public schools.
You blame your parents for not homeschooling you, because they had to work. You yourself would rather just work. Think about it a little. Would you be able to pull your kids out of school, homeschool them if you are busy working? Or would you send your kids directly to work at the age of 10? Would you like the state to rewrite child labor laws?
You blame the state legislators? This is the first time in our serval day long conversation that you mentioned legislators. You previously solely mentioned teachers, your school ect.
Perhaps you should petition your legislators instead of pointlessly arguing with random internet strangers.
I am a public school teacher. I am an educator. My job is helping young children gain life skills in the hope that they will be successful in life. I am only interested in solutions to problems. I don't see how any of your suggestions lead towards solutions.
Go try to make a positive contribution. You are just complaining that your experience in highschool sucked. 'Things should be different.' That's all I've heard from you. How are you going to make things different? Will it be better for all of us or does your solution only benefit your circumstances?
I can think of at least one, XD.
Cause and effect doesn't imply guilt. I am extremely privileged to have the parents I have.
Sorry, but that's exactly why this community exists, not necessarily only for pointless argument but for pointless discussion too. You are engaging in it just as much as me- and calling me biased for having an opinion you disagree with. Everyone is biased, including you, the issue is when bias influences decision making- check the modlogs and call it out if it does.
You and most people reject it is a problem, I am advocating it is.
I have a lot of problems with a lot of things. I am not virtuous enough to dedicate my life to solving all of them. I can still complain about them on the internet just as you do.
Thanks for the report, and it doesn't seem any noteworthy that would affect his status as moderator. If he does something like using his powers or status then I'll take action against him.
Thanks for not answering my question:
While I'm not sure if you're accurately portraying their position (i havent seen this myself), you have a point with this question that I'd also like an answer to.
Feel free to take a look.
https://lemmy.world/u/aidan
There's also claiming Hunter Biden's cocaine was found in the White House, and pretend ignorance that christofascism is even a thing, and just in general defending anything shitty republican do or say.
There's lots of other /politics on Lemmy tho, so it's not as bad as when this happened on reddit. Plenty of options besides this one.
That sort of duplicity is not something anyone should want in a mod. I've seen mods on reddit pretend that a guy literally spouting nazi slogans was just fine because he translated them into English first.
Hate speech, slurs, and abusive language are banned under rule 6. I'm not intending to set any rules, but I will enforce them.
I suppose we'll see how that shakes out in reality. You're already aware that I and others have doubts.
It's good to be skeptical of anyone who could censor important and controversial topics.
Do you have one in particular you recommend? This one feels like it's going downhill the past two days.
What a dumb ass.
No. I said that is the argument of some republicans.
No, I was wondering how the user I was replying to defined it- because from online discussions I've been on in the past everyone defines fascism differently.
Well, now's your chance to set the record straight and clear things up by confronting the issues directly:
Is it your belief that Hunter Biden’s cocaine was found in the White House?
Is christofascism a thing?
No probably not, I haven't looked into it too much- but I saw people on here saying it was in the tourist area.
Fascism can enforce an interpretation of Christianity- yes.
Do you believe that christofascist ideology holds influence in American politics?
I think nearly every ideology has some influence in American politics, as for significant influence not really(anymore, historically yes). I do think there is significant influence from Christian moralists but not exactly fascists.
You don't do direct answers, do you?
Life has nuance. I'm not going to give a matter-of-fact answer if I'm not 100% certain, I will acknowledge nuances.
Might be wise to add an age and education attainment requirement to be a moderator. I'm probably in the minority here but I appreciated the mods at r/politics. Mind you I've been temporarily-banned a few times from that sub, justifiably so (usually for stooping to the level of the uncivil). They were generally fair and didn't seem to exploit their positions from what I experienced in ten years there.
It's just too ironic that people left reddit because spez didn't understand how hard modding is...
And Lemmy is full of communities were the mods have no idea what they're doing, they just signed up a couple days earlier than everyone else.
Especially without established mod tools/bots like reddit had. It's going to be a shitshow.
How would education attainment be verified- and how could that seen as anything but alienating the working class. Also, what would be a good minimum age*?
Say, at least a PhD to post on here and minimum of 18 years old, maximum 32
True, I will talk to other mods about adding mandatory ID checking and notarized doctorate verification(probably by mail). /s
So, I won't admit to anyone else but aidan, but I looked at aidans and he seemed fine, while his opinion on schooling I may not agree with at all, doesn't mean it should affect his status as to be moderator, as both of us agreed, he was part of our 2 pick we need.
That's the problem...
You look at that kid's account history and think there isnt an issue.
It doesn't make anyone think better of him, it made us all realize you're likely just as bad.
Exactly. It's a wake up call that it's time to find a new politics sub.