This is exactly what the opponents of CoC-culture warned about: it's a clever rhetorical smokescreen to allow leftist freaks to do power grabs like this. Words like "harm", "inclusive", "community" etc have dual-meanings, one for the clique insiders and another for the outsiders.
And lmao wow, one of the mods involved in this is also a mod at lobste.rs. No wonder the "discussion" there looked so uncanny.
Irene also wasn't involved in me removing srid's attempted brigading or it being the last straw for his ban.
The author of this article doesn't seem particularly interested in checking facts, they implied some nasty stuff about my actions and motivation without bothering to read the publicly available info or contact me.
I'm not sure if you realize that people aren't as stupid as you seem to think they are, and they are getting tired of this ridiculous rhetoric, and in this particular case, it is quite provable that you are lying.
We know the game well, pretend you are legitimate at all costs, whether you are telling the truth or not. Well guess what? That doesn't inspire anyone to do anything, and only inflates your ego.
You know what does inspire folks? Being honest, even when you don't have to be. This is about more than just the BS unsubstantiated claim that Srid is somehow a "dangerous person" as so often is dubiously suggested, this is about folks being tired of this garbage already. It is quite ironic, in my view, that the only "crime" srid is commiting is being a part of a different culture. I thought we were all about inclusivity? What happened to that?
Tell the truth, or stfu so those that do can speak, I leave it in your hands. Please and thank you.
There was no attempted brigading. All srid did was post about a tutorial written on nixos.asia, I don’t see any problem in that. I was involved in the thread and it was hexa who posted an off-topic message in the thread. If anyone was in the wrong here, it was you and hexa.
Nowhere in the ban log you mentioned "attempted brigading"; rather what you mentioned, as reasons for the ban, was "lots of off-topic stories" & "[using] Lobsters to fight with the NixOS project".
Readers can’t judge for themselves because 23 of your comments and 21 of your stories were removed, mostly for abuse. (For context, less than 0.5% of commenters or submitters ever have a single removal.) You received several warnings about picking fights and you’re understandably focused on your fight with Nix but it only happened to be the last one you tried to start on Lobsters. There’s a pattern in your actions that’s why you keep getting rejected by technical communities, and it’s going to keep happening as long as you imagine a conspiracy or political motivation instead of looking at the pattern and taking responsibility for your behavior.
> [your fight with Nix] only happened to be the last one you tried to start on Lobsters.
For example, readers can easily verify that this statement is lie by going to that last submission and see that there was no fight (except Hexa himself fighting into the void):
So, once again, where is the evidence for your accusations?
(Incidentally, where you say "23 of your comments and 21 of your stories" -- a figure I can't confirm -- I'm sure none of those happened in the last few months or are related to Nix in anyway, as my involvement have exclusively been technical, ergo they are nothing to do with "[using] Lobsters to fight with the NixOS project", and if they were about "lots of off-topic stories" then I would have been banned long time ago.)
The comments are deleted so nobody can verify that it was "abuse". You're basically saying "source: trust me bro".
Back in the day, forums used to put a big fat USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST sticker on bad posts, but keep it around for posterity so people could see for themselves what the fuss was about. I don't like the secrecy of how moderation is done nowadays.
A explanation is visible to users on each comment and story, mod actions show up in a public log, and the site's source is available for any remaining questions on how things happened. There are users who store everything as it comes in via RSS or mailing list mode and call out mod mistakes as they see them. More broadly, modern moderation systems have evolved in response to the failures of the systems you describe. It's not about secrecy or power, it's about how leaving up abuse had a lot of bad effects that contributed significantly to the decline of platforms like Usenet.
>A explanation is visible to users on each comment and story, mod actions show up in a public log, and the site's source is available for any remaining questions on how things happened. There are users who store everything as it comes in via RSS or mailing list mode and call out mod mistakes as they see them.
None of that means anything if I can't see for myself what the purported infraction was. The most important piece of the puzzle is missing! "It's in the RSS feed" -- oh that's so helpful, I'll be sure to look for that in the locked filing cabinet in the disused lavatory, the one with the sign on the door saying "beware of the leopard".
It's a hallmark of a free and democratic society that criminal and civil proceedings are generally public, when someone is punished, we can easily look up what they were punished for. Obviously software forum arguments aren't as important or dramatic as legal disputes, but we imitate in the small what we admire in the large. It is disturbing to me that one side of this culture war calls itself "democratic", but acts like a Star Chamber.
The mod that deleted some* comments (wasn't the one related to NixOS) wrote something, so through the public mod actions, think found the discussion you speak of. Was it** https://lobste.rs/s/0qvtim/open_letter_nixos_foundation? Not what expected based on your comment. Seems most didn't align with the open letter and even bring negative points that hadn't noticed when read it.
*Although comments no longer can see based on previous it was becoming a heated conversation.
without commenting on this specific case because TLDR: the same argument could be used in a situation where moderators allow harassment against certain groups in the name of freedom of speech, while moderating harassment against others.
moderation is prone to power plays no matter which angle you approach it with.
And lmao wow, one of the mods involved in this is also a mod at lobste.rs. No wonder the "discussion" there looked so uncanny.