Context: https://lemmy.world/comment/14224519
I was just browsing some comments and came across this… exchange. In addition to “WTF is wrong with you” I also reported the comment for something like, ‘this person is using the plain definition of genocide to discredit the idea of genocide. this person is clearly some kind of bigot/troll, or a deeply ignorant and unserious person. please keep a close eye on this person.’ I think that’s the reason why another mod responded with the genocide articles. All this before I realized they were a mod. Incidentally, this flyingsquid character is still sealioning that nobody answered them and that “the genocide is, as I said, not all that horrific.” At least they put the words in their own mouth this time (downgraded from “you must not think it’s all that horrific” -what the fuck!?).
When I checked my inbox this morning I found they had responded, but this time I noticed their name, and the M next to it.
So I ask you, in this context (or any, really), is “…good god, you’re a mod here?” uncivil? I think the moderator is silencing legitimate criticism. I think it was the moderator being uncivil throughout. I think this flyingsquid character is a Power Tripping Bastard.
Ehhh, it’s kinda borderline, but being snide is definitely incivility, if not egregiously so.
If it had been a ban based on that single comment, yeah, that’s over the line. But just a comment removal? Nah, that’s a mod’s job, to mop up the piss so it doesn’t spread and stink up the joint.
Is a snide comment enough to increase the chances of a comment section jumping the shark? Kinda situational, but people do love to find an excuse to be dicks.
I would have removed the comment too, though I would have communicated my reasoning since it’s a matter of interpretation as to how the removed comment is intended. It could be taken as more of a “oh dear, I am surprised”, or more as “how did you manage to be a mod”, or even as a “you suck as a mod”.
While a mod expects a degree of nastiness, it comes along with the role; you still can’t let it go because when people are scrolling, the vibe of a community suffers from such things. The more snarky and snide comments there are, the more likely people are to think it’s okay. So removing them prevents future problems to a limited degree.
And that really does work. I’ve seen it from the user side and the mod side. If you intend to keep a community relaxed and friendly, you can’t allow slap fights and petty bullshit to stay up or it snowballs. It isn’t a matter of if, it’s when and how bad.
Now, there’s communities where that kind of thing is okay. If that’s the way someone wants to run a C/ or other forum, that’s fine. But you’ll notice as a user that those communities end up getting very toxic very fast.
See, people think that because they don’t curse or directly insult someone, that they’re still being civil. That is absolutely not the case. Don’t believe me? Well, bless your heart.
You can be very uncivil without telling someone to fuck themselves. And you can be perfectly civil while calling someone a cunt. If you don’t thin that’s true, well aren’t you just adorable.
A mod removing an off topic, probably rude comment is not power tripping, or silencing criticism. It’s literally what a moderator is supposed to do. If you have a problem with a mod, having it out inside a thread that isn’t about that is a dick move of its own. It’s just not the place or time.
Now, ignoring the specifics of your post, that specific comment and action.
Flying squid is a strange case. As a mod, he (they? I can’t recall for sure if they’re a guy or not, but I think they’ve specified their gender that way) gets called on the carpet a lot. Which can be an indicator of a problematic mod. I would, however, argue that this is power tripping bastards, not fair and equal moderation evaluation. Nobody posts here unless they disagree with a mod’s actions. There’s a selection bias inherent to the nature of the place.
The squid seems to err heavily on the side of minimizing disruptive comments, sometimes erring a little too much.
And, there may be some hypocrisy in allowing their own uncivil comments to stay up. But is that power tripping, or is it simply poor judgement? A mod that’s going to participate in their own C/ has to follow the same rules, or they’re just a dick. But it’s really easy to forget that, as a mod, you have your own idea of what is and isn’t a rule violation. That idea is not obvious to all users, and if you’re going to give your own comments leeway, you damn well need to do so for others. You have to remember that tone is hard to detect in writing, that English isn’t everyone’s first or best language, and that there are a ton of people that will say things that seem uncivil, but may well be just jocularity (the aforementioned “cunt” as an example).
It’s my personal opinion that if you can’t do that as a mod, if you can’t find that balance, it’s time to find a replacement. I’ve had to do it in the past tbh.
If you interact with squid outside of the hot button issues, they’re pretty damn chill. Outright friendly most of the time. So I have trouble believing malice on their part as a mod. I could be wrong, but it doesn’t fit their public behavior overall.
I can believe that anyone can exhibit bad judgement as a mod. Largely because I know I have, and I actively work to minimize that. If you’re aware of it being a probability, and you try not to, but you still fuck up, then anyone can. It’s how you handle fixing it that matters.
This is already longer than the short attention span we’ve developed online, so I’m going to stop here with a summation.
No power tripping with the specific mod action taken, but there is some questionable behavior overall.
I believe the mod in question is an abusive mod: I’ve seen them debate with someone in a conversation, bait them into sparring, then when the person responds, ban them for breaking the rules. That alone is moderator abuse, it’s not being objective, and an environment where the moderator tries to create ban incidents isn’t a friendly one to be in. For this reason I blocked every community where they are a moderator. Context
The misinformation removals require the mods to be a source of truth, which is asking a lot for non omniscient humans.
Their non-mod posts seems fine. I’m sure as a person they are normally great, but they don’t maintain the distance/objectivity (yet) to be a good mod.
I simply cannot agree (edit: based on this reasoning) that “…good god, you’re a mod here?” (for the record, intended as something like “your being a mod explains why no action was taken” or “you cannot say the things you have said here in the way that you’ve said them and also be a good moderator”) is an uncivil statement or sentiment to express. Conceivably it was very a uncomfortable, unwelcome, or even upsetting sentiment to read about one’s self. From my perspective, it is clear that the mod abusing their powers to silence criticism of their authority, not to remove an uncivil comment.
In contrast to you, I understand “civility” to refer explicitly to politeness in speech and writing, regardless of the actual sentiment (bless your heart is civil, but that doesn’t mean its sentiment is not unkind). In those terms, if either of my two comments were uncivil, it was clearly “WTF is wrong with you” which employed vulgarity to make my point. That said, googling civility comes up with anything from that plain “politeness” definition to extremely broad definitions including respect, tolerance, … I quite frankly cannot be asked to be any more respectful and tolerant towards apparently genocidal sentiments than I already have.
As I see it, they chose to ignore an arguably uncivil remark but exercised authority to remove “incivility” when I implied they were an arsonist hired as a firefighter.
I can’t tell the difference here.
Yeah and if you talk to my uncle about something other than race relations or the “lost cause” he’s pretty chill too. He loves talking about classical music and math.
Fair enough.
I mean, you can disagree about it being civil or not, but you asked. So, you know, why ask if you aren’t going to consider the possibility?
I welcome this challenge and thank you for keeping me honest.
I will rephrase: You have not successfully argued (in my opinion) that the removed comment was uncivil. I remain unconvinced, based on stated reasoning, that the removed comment was uncivil. I emphasize that I recognized the first comment as actually uncivil (both statement and sentiment) which should demonstrate a willingness in principle to recognize my own incivility.