If I understand it right, the moderator of the mastodon.world instance has blocked several posts by Hasnain Kazim, as Kazim reported yesterday on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/661473263/posts/10163657720033264/
Kazim is a quite famous and successful book author in Germany and something between left, conservative and liberal. He was journalist for the most important German weekly news magazine Spiegel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasnain_Kazim?wprov=sfla1
Canceling his posts is stupid and certainly completely exaggerated. To me from the external perspective it seems that the moderator is abusing his power. He is damaging free and respectful discussion. Furthermore, when a famous person like Kazim reports those experiences to his broad audience, who do not understand the functioning of the fediverse, the moderator also damages Mastodon in general significantly, it seems to me.
What do you think about this case ?
That was the only article I could find about him too.
It gave plenty of examples of him trolling bigots, almost nothing about him being a journalist except something he did for a student paper as a teenager
It seems very likely that he was fucking around and got banned for trolling.
Nope. He was simply stating the fact that arabic-language comments in international media have a large majority of people celebrating the guy who weaponized his car and killed people at Berlin Pride with it, and that this was a large problem. After that comment was deleted, he cited it with the additional comment that he had been censured by the mod and that this was pretty astounding.
This means that the Mastodon.world mod neither likes when it is shown up that arabs are celebrating when someone kills gay people in germany, and that he has very thin skin regarding critique towards his moderation style.
...
So, if we take you're unsourced opinion as fact...
He had a comment removed
He reposted the same comment with even more "context"
Mods banned him
And now you're shocked and want people to be outraged because Mastodon worked as intended?
You want us to...
Do what exactly? Stop using the instance none of us are using? Go yell at a mod because they did what they volunteered to do?
The perp wanted to join ISIS, you really think the same social group that danced in the streets after 9/11 is unable to praise someone running over gay people?
https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/1v8u3xo/seeing_many_muslim_justify_even_blatantly_support/
Deleting his comment means the mod either agrees with ISIS, or would rather silence others who condemn these reactions than stand with them. The ban makes me think more about the first category.
I just wanted to set the record straight. He didn't pull the reactions of these people out of his ass, and he was communicating that this is a dangerous development. (might be inviting copycats) And he's right! Everyone celebrating this hates gay people - it is gravely concerning, similar to neonazis praising a perp when they murder an immigrant.
Oh wow...
People still using reddit said inflammatory things?!
Next you're going to tell me everyone on twitter is actually the same person as their profile pic.
The people using arabic in online comments are of course not 100% arabs, but i'd bet 80%+are. And i am pretty sure that if you concentrate on those using arabic in international media who are fine with gay people dying, that this percentage gets a lot closer to 100%.
There's billions of Muslims...
So you could literally show me 10s of millions that are dicks, and I'll say that means thos 10s of millions of people are dicks.
I wouldn't say that means all the billions of Muslims are dicks.
You could sub "Muslim" for any demographic, my logic would stay the same because I'm not a fucking bigot.
If you ignore how these cultures abuse and kill their LGBT population with death sentences based on religious law, you are a bigot, because you wouldn't be that lenient if for example catholic italy would do the same.
Again:
The actions of even 10s of millions doesn't give you a reason to judge all 2+ billion.
It's based on "religious law" by the interpretation of extremists.
Something shared with the other two Abrahmic religions and multiple others.
But at this point you are being explicitly bigoted and don't have ignorance as an excuse
Thats the problem here: i don't see any countries where laws are based on the bible and interpreted in a way that legitimizes murder of minorities based on their gender and orientation, and especially not such a widespread usage of sharia law.
You can educate me if you know of any that do so currently, and i know that not everything is peachy in all countries (especially since Trump 2 in the US), but by and large this behaviour is not socially accepted and for sure our judges don't condemn anyone to death for being gay.
Sharia is fundamentally incompatible with democracy, and also in my view incompatible with human rights. And you are falling victim to the "no true scotsman" fallacy - denying that Muslims stance towards LGBT in general is absolutely abhorrent and often deadly where they have power doesn't help anyone.
The problem you have is those countries don't exist?
The reason they don't exist, is Western Christian nations never created them like they did for Islamic and Jewish extremists.
Seriously, whatever country you're talking about, go look on Wikipedia at who put the current regime in charge and what it was like before.
If you don't have a specific example in mind, use IRA.
I'm saying by that logic (which is wrong) you should apply it to anyone that follows any of the Abrahmic religions.
There would still be problems with it, but it would be logically consistent at least.
They banned him for trolling bigots!?
Come to MULTIVERSE! We love left wing trolls! Come sign up and tilt some bigots!
Comment up higher has context. He got banned for some Islamophobic reporting.
Probably more accurate to say he got banned for attempting to circumvent moderation. He was moderated for Islamophobia.