Agamemnon

Speculating:

Restricting posting from accounts that don't meet some adjustable criteria. Like account age, comment count, prior moderation action, average comment length (upvote quota maybe not, because not all instances use it)

Automatic hash comparison of uploaded images with database of registered illegal content.

"Yippee-Ki-Yay, Motherfucker!"

Haha, in some parts of germany you can do that yourself. on foot. with a zipdisk.

Ah... the endless plight of the Katanaplonkers...

Listen: The more you defend the Katana, the more fun it is to troll you by pretending anyone actually cares.

It's a sharp metal stick, alright. Stick 'em with the pointy end.

Testing please ignore

Denied. 😝

Be advised: I recognize this person joining and speedrunning Ban% in safespaces for several months now. This is at least my 4th sighting of them. They will antagonize the userbase in record time by blatant disregard of netiquette and basic human decency. They will cite any of their vast repertoire of mental conditions or minority membership cards as justification when called out on bad behavior - whatever is convenient at the time. Conversation to them is a game that must be won at all cost and people with even slightly differing opinions are seen as enemies that need to be defeated (and also humiliated) Their strategy is generally to single out one member and harass them with wall of text posts.

Do not engage. Do not educate - dozens have tried and failed. Just identify the pattern and ban permanently, before they can do any lasting damage to your community.

Where I moderate, even implied death threats are a zero-warnings bannable offense.

It's a shitpost. Humor is optional.

Haha, imagine having to solve a captcha for closing popups, so the content provider can prove to the advertisers that their shit was watched by a human.

And when that finally fails, we'll have to auth to every website with a crypto key to prove that we're a valid human data point.

If you get one made from the implant grade material (and manufacturing process): sure. If you want to print one at home: evidence inconclusive, do NOT recommend / won't clean easily / just. don't. bother.

Why wouldn't you hug the garbage, Mr. Zoidberg?

Everyone should be aware that the final say is provided by Putin. And is a foregone conclusion - for purely tactical and propaganda reasons, the official version will be that Prigozhin is dead. And nobody will contest that - least of all Prigozhin himself.

You're supposed to take a SVG from it, not BMP it all over the floor. :P

It's not about freedom of speech (or by some peoples interpretation it would be more accurately called 'anarchy of speech'). The need for moderation still exists just as the rights higher in the hierarchy of human rights still exist and need protection - especially from armchair anarchists.

Yup, can't get any more shitposty than this.

Only when the food asks to be hugged. ...which it usually does. :P

Is that an “implied” death threat?

It's not. Where are you going with this argument?

Glad to hear that.

What's in your head, in your heEead? Some bee, some bee, some bee-ie-ie-ie Oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh, eh-eh oh, ya-ya

Enjoy the benefits of having a higher barrier of entry while it lasts. /gen

A couple things...

• Figuring out meditation is real and doing a 180 on my opinion of it.
• Staying away from nicotine is 100% easier. (I tried to quit before and failed)
• [REDACTED] is up by 200%

I had to look up what that even is, because I haven't encountered that one before. (me not being US-American)

I cannot make a call on a reference to a quote brought forth on an unspecified subject without context.

In regards to JFK - yes that would count as advocating violence in a very generalised sense. But without context, again, I am not able to make a call, whether a ban on someone making the quote is justified or not. In general, moderation policy also falls under freedom of expression. Consequently, freedom of speech is not a claimable right against non-governmental agents. It's a thing that a lot of people seem to selectively overlook when advocating for what would actually be better described as "Anarchy of speech".

Autistic mind here: Reading yours is giving me a headache. It's like debugging a minecraft mod after patch day. Please reset aggression level to zero and run a malware scan.

What's a normie? I don't think I have seen one yet. /j

No problem, it's nice to have a level-headed exchange amidst an ongoing tornado of sewage :)

So, I can try to empathize with either side (mods and users) for each of the two quotes, and there might be scenarios where one is completely right and one is wrong. But as an outsider to the kind of debates where these quotes are commonly used, I simply don't have the cultural understanding to help much with answering your question. Sorry.

Drawing the arch back to my initial statement: There are several levels of escalation present between utilising famous people quotes to make a general point and trying to dodge around community rules by veiling direct threats to a specified (inferred from context) group. I am of the opinion that the guillotine-comment I replied to is definitely stepping over the line and only remains standing, because right now additional enforcement of rules is (probably) not going to improve the weather situation mentioned above.

Actually a Moodpost. Only the username is a little sus.

"Unnamed iStock photo model" is the best answer I managed to arrive at.

(User named 'pointy_end' enters the chat)

Linked site does not load.

who's that?

Let me rephrase the question:

Who is this actress? I feel I have seen her before, but I can't recall where and am lost for a name to google after.

I looked and the common pattern I see is that conservative parties are actually several smaller parties stacked in a trenchcoat, pretending to have a common direction, but too scared of adressing inner conflict. They still hope they can continue to uphold a facade of unity by pandering to the rightwingers.

It's not very effective. But I see that as a result of group-psychology and basic human incompetence, not as explicitly agreeing with fascist values.

That... is a very skewed way of looking at reality.

Neither namedropping nor virtue signalling nor spreading misinformation is okay.