spujb

(Example at the end)

Usually we discuss stereotypes in terms of how they are harmful—which is good because it’s super important to recognize and confront the stereotypes that perpetuate systems of oppression and hurt. That doesn’t mean all of them are harmful, though. Some are neutral and and some are a net positive. If you can think of neutral ones that’s fine but I’m especially interested in the constructive and beneficial ones. Hopefully I’m explaining this well enough but if it becomes clear I didn’t I’ll delete this post.

Example: I usually encourage people, especially kids and pedestrians, to assume that drivers can’t see you. While it’s not necessarily true even a majority of the time, it’s nevertheless a constructive stereotype to hold in terms of road safety.

this wasn’t one but also making a ManBearPig reference in current year should be a felony

This is inspired by this advice from a few months ago:

Stop giving shitty mods a free pass. Honest mistakes happen; but if the mod in question is assumptive, disingenuous, trigger-happy, or eager to enable certain shitty types of user, spread the word about their comm being poorly moderated. And don’t interact directly with the comm. I think that at least here in the Fediverse we should demand higher standards from our mods.

(Emphasis mine.)

In the past I have used places like !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world or !196@lemmy.blahaj.zone to call out mods on other subs, with mid-to-almost-high degrees of success, but I wonder if it would be better to have a dedicated sublemmy?

Here are my thoughts on what would make this effective:

• probably shouldn’t be hosted on .world due to the breadth of possible conflicts of interest with admins
• probably shouldn’t be hosted on .ml due to federation hurdles
• mods of the community shouldn’t moderate any other communities of any significant size, in order to make the whole “accountability” thing work
• mods should be willing and able to deal with substantial quantities of garbage posts because there would be a lot of “why won’t c/xyz let me be transphobic/say slurs 😡😡” type submissions which, left unaddressed, would outflood genuine criticism

This is still in conceptual form so I am interested what others think :)

• Authoritarian First Known Use: 1861
• Holocaust date 1941-1945
• Horseshoe theory is attributed to Jean-Pierre Faye in his 1972 book Théorie du récit: introduction aux langages totalitaires, in relation to Otto Strasser.
• There is no evidence that Jean-Pierre Faye has ever denied the Holocaust. In fact, Faye has engaged in scholarly work that discusses the Holocaust and antisemitism.

disclaimer i have no opinion on this “media bias/fact check”, site. i just think the “don’t outsource critical thinking” comment is hilarious

that said if any FOSS devs want to make an app for categorizing and tagging memes outside the camera roll so i can use it for its intended purpose i will volunteer a (consensual) kiss on the forehead

Created using feedback from https://lemmy.cafe/post/4823550. Maybe this can be useful.

Transcript: See something off? Do your part to keep the Lemmy community safe:

R - Read the rules of the community.
E - Explain your report, including rule # when possible.
P - Provide context the mods should know.
O - Opt-out, disengage, downvote or block. Don't add to the drama.
R - Reach out or report right away. *For extremely time-sensitive content (CSAM, gore) DM an admin via Matrix: Instance homepage > Sidebar > click admin's @username > Send Secure Message
T - Trust your instincts. If in doubt, report it.

With recent events hilighting the value of quality moderation, it got me to consider: How can we help you out?

What steps, considerations, encouragements or warnings would you give the userbase regarding best practices for using the report feature (or other interraction with mods)? Reporting less, reporting more, putting more detail in the form, or just leaving it blank?

I was thinking of maybe putting together a psa-style infographic (a la think before you post) if the answers you give are poignant or significantly unknown to the average user.

(Content warning, discussions of SA and misogyny, mods I might mention politics a bit but I hope this can be taken outside the context of politics and understood as a discussion of basic human decency)

We all know how awful Reddit was when a user mentioned their gender. Immediate harassment, DMs, etc. It's probably improved over the years? But still awful.

Until recently, Lemmy was the most progressive and supportive of basic human dignity of communities I had ever followed. I have always known this was a majority male platform, but I have been relatively pleased to see that positive expressions of masculinity have won out.

All of that changed with the recent "bear vs man" debacle. I saw women get shouted down just for expressing their stories of being sexually abused, repeatedly harassed, dogpiled, and brigaded with downvotes. Some of them held their ground, for which I am proud of them, but others I saw driven to delete their entire accounts, presumably not to return.

And I get it. The bear thing is controversial; we can all agree on this. But that should never have resulted in this level of toxicity!

I am hoping by making this post I can kind of bring awareness to this weakness, so that we can learn and grow as a community. We need to hold one another accountable for this, or the gender gap on this site is just going to get worse.