this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
92 points (96.9% liked)

Fediverse

35465 readers
133 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

i know you've all heard it before, but i didn't catch up, i was honestly a bit surprised when i was browsing and tesseract on dubvee shut down.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why would you downvote that post though?

[–] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

The post was fine, the premise is wrong about the fediverse. That's why I downvoted and didn't interact further.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago

Hm, I see. Fair, to be honest.

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What did you interpret the premise to be? I read the post when it was up, and it read to me like OP was saying essentially that too many toxic users and not enough admins willing to stand up to them make the overall experience not fun.

EDIT: Which is accurate in my mind at least when it comes to Lemmy

[–] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This fediverse experiment was a failure.

The whole notion that the fediverse is a failure. Ptz is entitled to his opinion, but he couldn't be serious that everyone would hold that inflammatory opinion as well. I still stand by my opinion that the fediverse is better off without toxic admins like this.

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

He said "this" experiment, not "the fediverse" which I interpreted to mean his instance (or perhaps Lemmy).

That said, I'm honestly curious what do you care about his "toxicty" if he's not an admin of your instance? You don't seriously believe you have a right to dictate what he does with his own hardware do you?

[–] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

Better phrasing would be "this experiment within the fediverse". His phrasing still comes across as the fediverse (as an experiment) being a failure to me. I've not seen fediverse used as an adjective before.

It's the same reason I'm not on .ml and your instance (I saw how they ran things over on reddit) and try to limit interactions on the instances that are notorious for their heavy handed moderation. He can do whatever he wants, but so can I within the limits of the sh.itjust.works instance or even spinning up my own. That's the reason I think he got butthurt. He got called out for how he ran things in front of the fediverse, didn't like it, got mad, took his ball and went home and likely banned me and 5 other guys for his bad phrasing at best or his opinion at worst. He's free to do that and I believe that the fedivdrse is better for it.

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Eh, I think you're projecting. He literally owned his instance. He was playing with his own ball at his own house and you got "butthurt" because he didn't want to play with you.

It's no secret that a lot of people are attracted to Lemmy because they felt Reddit mods were too overbearing, but some of us like Lemmy because we didn't think Reddit mods were doing enough about the overbearing users.

[–] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone banning for downvoting is incredibly petty or thin skinned, just my observation. If it wasn't for the instance shutting down, it would have made a good post on yptb. Reading other comment threads on this post support the thin skinned theory imho. I just happened to be browsing all when I found the post. Looking at my subs, I wasn't subscribed to any community there.

I won't forget the mods of the star trek subreddit banning people for just criticizing Disco and Picard not for being woke or whatever other conservative dog whistles at the time, but for legitimate reasons. That's the behavior I avoid. I don't need a mod to protect me from differing opinions. It's the internet ffs. Then there was the crusade against all the "_trek" subreddits. Claiming harassment to get Reddit to shut them down so that no one with differing opinions about the shows could have a community was absolutely inexcusable. That's why I avoid your instance like the plague.

It's also the best part of Lemmy and fediverse on the whole and what we agree on. No one person can control everything.

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Anyone banning for downvoting is incredibly petty or thin skinned, just my observation. If it wasn't for the instance shutting down, it would have made a good post on yptb. Reading other comment threads on this post support the thin skinned theory imho. I just happened to be browsing all when I found the post. Looking at my subs, I wasn't subscribed to any community there.

What about in the context of mass-downvoters? I can't speak for Dubvee, but mass-downvoters do exist - and they can be corrosive for smaller communities trying to grow, as early downvotes of threads can effectively kill them. These are accounts that seem to primarily downvote and don't actually interact on-site, and have no real pattern to it. This kind of response has little to do with sensitivity.

[–] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 1 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

In this instance there were 6 downvotes to 83 upvotes for over 93% positive rate in 3 days on an announcement community for an instance. If 6 is mass downvotes, then I suspect your are looking for any excuse to justify toxic moderation.

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 1 points 32 minutes ago* (last edited 31 minutes ago)

Yeah, I am just speaking as a general principle - not whatever happened here. Mass downvoting isn't at all observed like that anyway. It's the behaviour from some individual accounts that repeatedly downvote different threads from a specific community. So you'd be looking at habits across threads.

If in my community (for instance) someone was to come in and just downvote the entire first page, I'd probably ban them because that would just be a crude attempt to target it. And again: downvoting like that is worse for smaller communities trying to grow.