Link to community: [email protected]
this post was submitted on 31 May 2021
-2 points (47.1% liked)
Announcements
23526 readers
92 users here now
Official announcements from the Lemmy project. Subscribe to this community or add it to your RSS reader in order to be notified about new releases and important updates.
You can also find major news on join-lemmy.org
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So you would say that your opinion is superior to mine, because people in your surroundings agree with you? It might surprise you to hear this, but people in my surroundings also agree with me, but for me that isnt a reason to claim superiority. Would you really prefer if Lemmy was an echo chamber where everyone thinks just like you?
This chap believes all people are equal but some people are more equal than others. And if anyone questions them, they will dismiss others with some goal shifting, generalised labelling or ignorant handwaving.
Both chaps do, actually 😉
I'd consider my stance on a lot of things more reputable and more within reason than yours, yes.
In one of your earlier comments, you laughed at the notion of western propaganda. Do you believe that western sources / media are more reputable than others?
I think there exists western propaganda. But not the one you think exists.
What is the kind of western propaganda you think that Dessalines thinks exists? What kind of western propaganda does exist in your opinion and why doesn't the other kind?
I don't think this is the best place to go in to detail about that, but I'll do it since you asked.
First, I should admit there are media sources in the west that can be sensational, in-factual or even being pure propaganda outlets. However these are not regarded as reputable sources in the west either.
Where I think dessalines and others takes it too far is when they regard mainstream reputable and scrutanized sources as propagandamachines against China and Russia. And conspiracies go as far as NATO being a neo nazi organization.
Here is a rough list, although not everyone of them probably agree on who they feel about all the sources:
These people will refute everything posted that is negative towards Russia, Belarus and China. And talk down sources as these. I've also seen downvoting on criticism of north korea which I've found weird. I don't think that is very rational, at least if you understand how legitimacy and how heads will roll in media for doing inappropriate things.
At the same time they are using alternative news sources things like:
Which are specifically known for spreading conspiracies
Which I'd consider pretty bad
And why is that? Do you not think that everyone is entitled to their own opinion?
Apparently I not. And apparently you can't make value judgments on other people's opinions either.
Thanks for confirming. I will take this opportunity to ban you from /c/worldnews, because of your hostile behaviour there. This is something I should have done long ago. The main reason I didnt is that I didnt want to give the impression that you were targeted because of our political disagreements. But the fact is that you are causing too much trouble. Take this as a warning, if you keep being hostile to other users, you will get a site ban.
I think you shouldn't ban people just because they're not nice to you. Which problems did they cause in [email protected]? (EDIT: clarifying that I read some of their comments, but nothing banworthy yet – so I'm not saying they don't cause trouble, just that I'd like to see at least a few instances of hard evidence against them).
We don't all agree on Lemmy. You're doing right now what you accuse @[email protected] of:
Bruh. "Spamming" links to Reuters and Telegraph hardly counts as "hostile behaviour" in my book. If you ban them because you don't like the content they're sharing and you're the mod of [email protected], just say so. It'd at least be honest. Maybe even honest to yourself.
Censoring wrong opinions instead of answering them with proper sources is a pretty "interesting" move. Sure, you can't talk to fascists, but I don't see one here. They're entitled to their opinion, just as you are entitled to ban them from your community – don't say you're doing this because you're superior, when you claim to not claim superiority. This is an oxymoron.
Do you have a specific instance that transgress the rules though? Or is it a personal thing? Doesn't really seem fair.
I made a longer comment here. If you still dont know what the problem is after reading that, then I really dont know how to explain it to you.
You made a longer comment without concrete examples linking back to this thread here? What kind of circular doublethink is that? At least ban people because they spread verifiable misinformation. You didn't provide any of them, just your own biased sources, as far as I can tell. I'll be happy to revise this comment when you can link a few good examples where you're not just doing the spiderman pointy-game.
what
this is probably exactly the kind of comments you have been banned for. Your view is not superior to others. You have a different opinion and can't accept it.
Coincidentally, the admin can't accept your opinion either.