Fuck that was brutal. Good!
Reuters Artilce Link about the broadcaster pulling the footage because of the commentary.
Incidentally, Lemmy would have had this comment removed by a moderator because “no politics.”
And people actually think that’s great because they don’t want to deal with the unpleasantness of reality; they just want to be entertained - see here.
You’re fucking on Lemmy seeing this.
Don’t blame every instance for the moderation of shitty instances and comms.
This comment tells me that I should rather watch Swiss television instead.
Your comments tell me you have no clue on anything.
Oh and:
You won’t find this on Swiss TV, you will find it on Lemmy.
If you want politics in communities, go start your own community. Nothing is stopping you, that’s the strength of Lemmy. You’re just upset a post got removed and decided to spam everywhere instead of making a change.
Nope, I’m about to leave this platform. I’ve already stopped my financial support. Instead, I’m going with Piefed, because the developers there aren’t ideologues like the ones who engage in arbitrary censorship, as is the case with .ml.
I’ve had enough of this bullshit.
I am on PieFed, changing software is not the solution to your issue. You will still interact with whatever community that removed the comment on PieFed because it is a moderation issue on that individual comm/instance. PieFed syncs with all the same communities as Lemmy instances can.
.ml has no fucking relevance to whatever I presume .world comm removed the post.
You sound completely uninformed on how this whole Fediverse thing works and are going around blaming the wrong thing for your issue and choosing a solution that won’t change anything for you.
Of course, I realize that. For me, it’s simply a question of who I support. There is no alternative to the Fediverse. But I will not participate in communities that open the floodgates to censorship because they take the same approach as the goddamn IOC. “No politics” is one such rule, as this post shows- there could be no rule that is more broadly formulated and gives the mods maximum leeway for arbitrariness. There are certainly technical ways to give people the option to hide political posts in the most popular communities. However, since the Lemmy developers are staunch tankies, there is absolutely no hope of this happening with this application. So the logical consequence is to leave this platform.
You could have left without the performative flounce.
After trying for more than two years to support this platform with some content, even though it’s not my thing, I thought it would be appropriate. But thank you very much for your opinion - it seems to be your thing to express it.
good riddance, i’m only three comments in and already sick of your bullshit
Very confusing take since from what I see Lemmy is absolutely saturated with unpleasant political realities
Isn’t it still the same logic?
And look at the downvotes: People don’t want to hear this - upvotes when someone goes against the “community rules” of Olympia, downvotes for this comment.
But it’s exactly the same thing: Someone is rightly complaining about how absurdly degenerate humanity has become at an event that is meant to be entertaining.
No, the logic is entirely different.
You are complaining that Lemmy removes political posts because people don’t want to see unpleasant political realities. Yet this post, which is about an unpleasant political reality, has 108 upvotes, 1 downvote, and has not been removed. The post objectively and directly contradicts your claim. You’re literally commenting on a Lemmy post saying “Lemmy would remove this post” - but this is clearly false.
You are being downvoted for saying something clearly false, not because of discussing an unpleasant political reality. Your comment does not even discuss an unpleasant political reality. It discusses your opinion of how posts are handled on Lemmy.
You are trying to claim that people downvoting your comment proves that people don’t want to deal with unpleasant political realities, but that’s not why people are downvoting you. The downvotes on your comment only show that people don’t want to deal with objectively and demonstrably false opinions about Lemmy moderation.
I say that it could hardly be more arbitrary than “no politics.” Nothing else.
No, you say
"Incidentally, Lemmy would have had this comment removed by a moderator because “no politics.”
And people actually think that’s great because they don’t want to deal with the unpleasantness of reality; they just want to be entertained - see here."
The first sentence is false, because your comment is on Lemmy and not removed.
The second sentence is false, because people on Lemmy do want to deal with unpleasantness, and don’t just want to be entertained - as proven by the engagement in this post and many others.
The claim “The ‘no politics’ rule is too arbitrary” is only hinted at in your comment - if you had instead commented this sentence initially, you probably wouldn’t be downvoted as much. Although it would be a totally off-topic comment for this post. If this is what you intended to communicate, you did not communicate it well.
So now that I know what you’re trying to communicate, I can say that yes, I agree with you that “no politics” is a very arbitrary rule. However, that does not automatically make your other claims true (which we can tell by the fact that your other claims are demonstrably false).
Is it maybe possible that you don’t understand how federation works? And possibly that you’re posting these comments from a non-Lemmy service, which is cross-posting to Lemmy without you realizing it? This might explain the confusion.
So you’re saying that it’s great that athletes are banned from the Olympics if they dare to make a political statement? That the Fediverse should give its moderators the same power as the IOC to protect unpopular opinions from being spread too widely - on the grounds that it should only be fun and games?
No, I am saying nothing about the Olympics and its stance on political statements. I am completely uninterested in anything about the Olympics right now. I am interested only in your wrong statement, and in helping you to see how your belief is wrong.
All of my claims pertain exactly to one specific thing: your claim that “people don’t want to deal with the unpleasantness of reality, they just want to be entertained”, specifically that you seem to say this is prominent on Lemmy.
That claim, you must now admit, for the reasons I have previously explained, is wrong. Don’t you agree?
Because all over Lemmy, I see posts about unpleasant political realities. Genocide, child abuse, political murders, corruption. These are some of the most popular and discussed things on Lemmy.
Yes, there are a few small communities where politics is forbidden, but to say that this is the general case for Lemmy is clearly inaccurate, don’t you think?
