So, I saw a report from one of my users. They reported:

https://ponder.cat/post/1594852/1813842

For the reason:

Unreasonable fighting with everyone in every simple post

I think that’s ridiculous, so I talked with them about it. Posting private communications is frowned upon I guess, but long story short, they weren’t receptive. I’ve decided to ban the account.

IMO the general culture on Lemmy is that users are entitled to their free account and everyone needs to be careful and circumspect about limiting that entitlement in any way, but I don’t see it that way. I don’t think it’s a requirement for me to provide hosting space for anyone who wants to use my stuff as a jumping-off point for abuse of Lemmy’s systems, and isn’t apologetic or receptive when I talk with them about not doing that. The fact that it’s in service of harassing FlyingSquid in particular is just icing on the cake, since my perception is that people like to harass him apparently for no legitimate reason at all (with this as an example).

AITA?

  • PhilipTheBucketOPA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    It’s a fair point. I talked more about it here:

    https://ponder.cat/post/1596872/1816086

    Basically, my point is, they knew exactly who FlyingSquid was and were familiar with Lemmy already from some other accounts, and on their first day, started reporting comments of his without claiming that anything was wrong with them, saying that just because of who he is, any comment of his deserves to be reported.

    I can understand the point of view that a permaban for that behavior is too much. As a general rule, I actually agree 100%. But to me looking at the context, their other comments, and especially how they reacted when I asked them not to do that, it was time for them to go.

    Edit: Also… I do want to apologize a bit for this sequence of events (Please understand that I am listening and this whole conversation was valuable for me to understand and check myself on it):

    • Me: AITPTB?
    • People: FUCK YES
    • Me: Well, if you saw the DMs I won’t show you, you’d understand. I’m still right.
    • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago
      • Me: AITPTB?
      • People: FUCK YES
      • Me: Well, if you saw the DMs I won’t show you, you’d understand. I’m still right.

      If you’re going to ask here then say “Umm achkually I’m not a PTB” what ws the point of making this thread? Just hoping to take away from the person who was doing the reporting so they wouldn’t ask if you’re a PTB? If that was it then it backfired because people indeed do think it’s wrong to ban people for and to discourage reporting.

      • PhilipTheBucketOPA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Because I react very differently to people who saw “report, didn’t like, ban the person who reported” and are without further investigation giving their reaction to that (totally insane) decision, versus the people who clicked the link, talked with me about the context, and things like that.

        Most of the people who simply assumed that I personally thought the report was invalid and so I banned the person (which would, again, be an absolutely insane thing to do), I’m just discounting whatever they have to say about it. Sorry. I don’t need someone to tell me that that would be nuts.

        Some of the people who clearly wanted to understand the fuller scope also told me I was a PTB. Which, maybe so. Some of them found the person I was talking about and read the profile and said “Holy smokes that guy’s clearly off his rocker” or some variation. We talked about it. I’m not out here trying to be stubborn about my way only, but I’m also not required to accept whatever anybody tells me just because they’re telling it to me. Sorry. A lot of it has to do with how much effort they seem like they put into understanding what happened.