Chinese propaganda is rampant on the fediverse. We need to discuss ways to combat this. One group- memes or something is wholly controlled by Chinese state actors. What do you think?

  • realitista@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yes it’s okay as long as it’s a legal order. And there are plenty of legal targets in Moscow and St. Petersburg.

    • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      So you see how people react to that and go wow that person wants <insert country here> to be able to kill civilians?

      Especially after saying and I quote

      Yes it’s okay as long as it’s a legal order. And there are plenty of legal targets in Moscow and St. Petersburg.

      it’s fine if a legal order?

      Edit

      Oh people quoting you is probably what you meant by

      But this is what it’s like on .ml. Someone will twist your argument into something that can get you banned without you even saying the words that you are getting banned for. It’s a worthless place to be.

      • realitista@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        If you want to give an example of what an .ml mindfuck, being taken out of context and banned is like, congrats you have succeeded.

        So you think it’s legal to expressly target civilians?

        And no one could quote me saying the things they said I did because I didn’t.

        • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          This is literally what was removed and the entire argument/question. Do you think people are okay targets if in wrong country, and it’s yes.

          So you think it’s legal to expressly target civilians?

          Again it was if it’s a legal order is it okay for them to kill people or civilians and you said yes. But now that you see it you’re not too no I totally meant not if being specifically targeted, but it’s fine if they’re collateral

          Like fuck how does this keep happening, especially from the ones calling ml a shit hole

          • realitista@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I think we have a misunderstanding. I meant legal by international law. It is not legal by international law to target civilians. So no, I do not think it’s okay to target civilians, full stop.

            But yes this is very much how .ml feels. Twisting words to achieve some sort of propaganda win. Excellent job there.

            • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Yes we have a misunderstanding, but not the definition of law.

              But yes this is very much how .ml feels. Twisting words to achieve some sort of propaganda win. Excellent job there.

              Again not twisting any words. This is why most think ml does censorship. They come in, say terrible things and when comment removed or banned call foul.

              This is what a 10+ comment deep thread and you still can’t admit why anyone would think it was poor wording

              • realitista@lemmus.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                In that specific case I was banned for words I didn’t say. Same technique you are trying here, to ask me if legal attacks should be allowed and then changing the definition of legal. And there are plenty of mods for just saying something which the CCCP doesn’t like:

                Okay… From the last couple days.

                Removed Comment He’s also either blackmailed or employed by china (multiple visits including his honeymoon, where he spent the night not with his wife but in the room with a number of school kids that he also brought with him… On his honeymoon) by NihilsineNefas @slrpnk.net reason: Misinformation

                mod Removed Comment There are lots of countries, including all the western countries where fewer people answered affirmatively to that question, where people are far more free to express their opinions than in China, though. The most obvious reason being that the majority of the world’s countries do not have a Great Firewall. This is what shows that there is a bias in the Chinese answers – or possibly a bias the other way in the western ones, but either way it means the results are not meaningfully comparable. edit: > What’s happening is that working class speech is relatively free, while capitalist and corporate speech is not. That’s why the vast majority say they have freedom of speech, while we know the state censors private, capitalist speech. “I don’t want to work the 996 work week” is the epitome of working class speech, whereas supporting it is corporate speech. China chose to censor it. by turdas @suppo.fi reason: misinformation 1 score Show in context realitista You to Fediverse@lemmy.world · Chinese propaganda is rampant on the fediverse · 17m ago

                You conveniently missed these:

                Time mod Action

                mod Banned realitista @lemm.ee from the community Technology reason: Rule 1 expires: 7 months ago

                mod Removed Comment More like someone who lives in a country that survived communism and the oppression that it brings and who would never go back. Why don’t you guys move to China or North Korea (or inexplicably Russia which you also brigade for). Try living in the utopias you brigade for? by realitista @lemm.ee reason: Rule 1

                mod Removed Comment You should pop on over to North Korea and tell us how great it is there. by realitista @lemm.ee reason: Rule 1

                • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  https://lemmy.world/comment/21823351

                  In that specific case I was banned for words I didn’t say

                  Expect we can see from the mod log the removed comment was for advocating collective punishment.

                  Same technique you are trying here, to ask me if legal attacks should be allowed and then changing the definition of legal.

                  Again not changing definition pointing out legal doesn’t mean people won’t get killed.

                  For the rest is your point you do lots of comments that get removed?