this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
41 points (87.3% liked)

FediLore + Fedidrama

3141 readers
10 users here now

Rules

  1. Any drama must be posted as an observer, you cannot post drama that you are involved with.
  2. When posting screenshots of drama, you must obscure the identity of all the participants.
  3. The poster must have a credible post and comment history before submitting a piece of history. This is to avoid sock-puppetry and witch hunts.

The usual instance-wide rules also apply.

Chronicle the life and tale of the fediverse (+ matrix)

Largely a sublemmy about capturing drama, from fediverse spanning drama to just lemmy drama.

Includes lore like how a instance got it's name, how an instance got defederated, how an admin got doxxed, fedihistory etc

(New) This sub's intentions is to an archive/newspaper, as in preferably don't get into fights with each other or the ppl featured in the drama

Tags: fediverse news, lemmy news, lemmyverse

Partners:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
sexy_peach@feddit.org
41
"Anti-AI trolls," transphobia, fun stuff (quokk.au)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au to c/fediverselore@lemmy.ca
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Okay so here's what happened.

There is a mod of some AI-generated image forums who has been slinging out bans for "anti-AI trolling" to people who have never participated in their community, apparently more or less at random. Full disclosure, I am one of those people, and I'm confident I have never done any anti-AI trolling.

Apparently the justification for this is that other people are being aggressively hateful to this mod, coming in and being incredibly abusive, transphobic, insulting her for alleged alcoholism and making fake pictures of her and generally just being horrible. Conveniently, one of these people showed up in the thread where we were talking about it, on cue, and started slinging around horribleness which provided a convenient cover for people to say "And THAT's why we have to be really strict with the bans!" type of things. We never really got to the bottom of what the connection was between that and the random bans to other people who were longstanding accounts that didn't seem to be doing any of those things.

Anyway, now another abusive alt of the (now obviously bannned) abusive alt that originally stirred up trouble has made a pitch-perfect effort to inflame divisions and create a balkanization between the "pro AI" people, centered around dbzer0 (edit: ~~and blahaj~~), and "anti AI" people, centered around everywhere else.

This is two identical posts, made to two separate communities which are guaranteed to have totally opposite takes on it based on their different levels of information about the issue, which will then lead everyone to assume that the other community is just being horrible about it on purpose when they draw different conclusions:

(Edit: The troll has now been banned, so I can't link to their posts anymore. Just imagine this post, except made by one of the trolls who are featured in the comments of that post, you can dig in the modlog or in spoiler text of some other comments to see some of what they were saying. Anyway, the troll posted the exact same complaint about being "unfairly" banned both to lemmy.world, where they got tons of sympathy and upvotes, and to dbzer0, where people who were aware of what they were up to gave them derision and downvotes.)

Like I said, if the goal is to create division and heated argument between two opposing "camps," this is pretty much as perfect as you can get it. I expect it to work, at least to a certain amount, to get people embittered towards one another and arguing about the issue impassioned that the other side is wrong and stupid.

I can't find the link right now, but there was someone on reddit who claimed that they used to do this professionally (trying to disrupt online communities so that organized shilling could succeed better there, because the previous coherence that they had had had been replaced by confusion and bickering, and then they could insert bullshit without it being pushed back on as strongly.) It's fascinating. What they described isn't exactly like this, but it definitely sort of rings similar to me. Just to throw that out there.

Also, UniversalMonk is involved, because of course he is.

Edit: Fun with grammar

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Also, UniversalMonk is involved, because of course he is.

I'm gonna repeat your favorite comment and ask where's your proof? Give me receipts.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/u/UniversalMonk?page=1&sort=New&view=Comments

Pretty much all of the bottom section of that page is UM getting involved in the drama of this particular "anti-AI troll." He's getting involved on the correct side, but the point is he is certainly involved.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

that's bullshit. when you say "UM is involved", you make it sound like UM is behind it in some way. feeding trolls isn't being involved, and you know it.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But how would else Phillip win when he can ignore your posts and say no one has anything to say?

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

In my opinion, someone who's involved in the conversation is "involved." Cryptagion's point isn't totally weird or crazy, but I don't really agree with it. Especially given the nature of UM's previous involvement on Lemmy, I think it's relevant if he was heavily involved in the comments for this thing, so in passing, I noted it.

I've had my share of slapfights for the day at this point. Probably for the week. What could possibly be gained by me creating a reply saying, "No, it's not bullshit! I didn't make it sound that way!" and similar things?

It feels like you really want the hostility to continue beyond the point where everyone's had their say. I have no idea why. Excitement? A desire to see as much disagreement and arguing as possible? He asked for proof, I provided, he disagreed with the interpretation, and at that point anyone who wants to read can make up their mind whose argument made sense. I have absolutely no interest in continuing beyond that point. You're free to conclude for some reason that it's a sin for me to do that, I view it as a pretty constructive approach to take.

Edit: Also, I completely forgot this even, but when UM raised the exact same objection up at the top of the thread, I actually had a pretty long conversation with him including explaining myself in detail and also apologizing about sort of bringing his name up in the nature of a punchline. We talked over DM a little bit, it didn't go anywhere because UM, and I exited the conversation, but because I'm not just a shouty little conflict creator, I actually took it seriously and had a conversation about it.

This is, again, why I think it's incredibly weird that a certain contingent of Lemmy is all up in arms about "PugJesus starts arguments!" as this big sin he's committed. Y'all love this kind of slapfight, you love finding shit you can complain about or having endless hostility with people you don't like. It's fine, I do that sometimes too although I try to cut it off when it seems like it's beyond the point of anything useful, but for you to accuse someone of arguing, stalking, following people around to give them votes or argumentative comments, etc etc, as a bad thing is hilarious given these last few messages (to pick one of any number of examples I could.)

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Weird how you didn't reply to the other person but okay. _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com

This is, again, why I think it’s incredibly weird that a certain contingent of Lemmy is all up in arms about “PugJesus starts arguments!” as this big sin he’s committed. Y’all love this kind of slapfight, you love finding shit you can complain about or having endless hostility with people you don’t like.

lol

Please lemme know when I'm anywhere near as bad as pugjesus, calling people fascists because they want democrats to fight harder, or saying they don't do something as they actively document themselves doing it. My admins will remove my messages/comments when I fuck up, hold me and them up to it. Unless I have the grave sin of "I don't like .world" which is why UM and R2O get harassed despite not doing anything.

But I know you'll always side with Pug over the people he harasses, and never actually talk to the people who are more equipped to deal with you than I am. Like the admins you ignore, or the users who are more familiar of your style.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My admins will remove my messages/comments when I fuck up, hold me and them up to it

Make sure you guys agree on a safeword beforehand

[–] Canyon201@lemmy.world -4 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Look.

I'm DONE with these TANKIE instances I'm going with my man @cm0002@lemmy.world and lets BOICOT these instances that collect tankie takes like the Community Party of China collects human rights abuses.

DB0 (the man not the instance) is always talking about camps so i'm putting him in the UYGHYR CONENTRATION CAMP DENYIER camp at this point because he is letting DB0 (the instance not the man) become the forth member of the tankie triad

Maybe if they kept the porn on the PORNLEMMY we could keep this place clean of NSFW and Tankies.

Write this down because I won't repeat myself

Make 👏 Tankies 👏 Afraid 👏 Of 👏 Social 👏 Media 👏 Again - donate to piefed

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

We'd rather you not repeat yourself regardless.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Damn, anarchists who explicitly hate tankies are tankies now.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago

listen, it's db0 and dbzer0. if you're gonna make shit up, at least get the names right.

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Also, UniversalMonk is involved, because of course he is.

How am I involved?! I have nothing to do with this drama. I'm not the mod of those communities, nor am I the person complaining about any of it.

Only thing I've done is vote and comment in the !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com community where the issues first came up.

Thanks, friend! :)

[–] Walk_blesseD@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

"pro AI" people, centered around dbzer0 and blahaj,

Jesse what the fuck are you talking about

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, maybe I was wrong. I thought there were some blahaj people in the grouping that was saying "yeah this makes total sense" but I don't see it looking back now. Maybe it was in the deleted threads or maybe (more likely) I entirely hallucinated it, I'll remove that part.

[–] Walk_blesseD@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 days ago

Idk, it's entirely possible that there's one or two of them on here, but from what I've seen it's definitely not the majority opinion, that's all I'm saying.

[–] gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago

The dbzer0 admins and users are definitely creating a problem where there is none, even if there are some anti-AI trolls.

Take a look at this thread where a dbzer0 user was harassing people and using a handful of accounts to manipulate votes: https://lemmy.world/post/32430859

Multiple admins and users came around to start shit about anti-AI when the problem had absolutely nothing to do with that at all.

[–] geekwithsoul@piefed.social 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, I was one of the ones banned from a number of AI communities despite not engaging with them really on my old Lemm.ee account. With UM involved, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised :) Sounds like just the sort of shit he'd have a hand in stirring up and just the way he'd do it.

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

With UM involved

I'm not involved though. I have nothing to do with it. Someone saying, "universalmonk is involved!" doesn't make it real. Please provide any proof that I have anything to do with what OP is talking about. I'm not the mod of the community OP is talking about, nor the person posting that OP is talking about. I've commented on comment about the issue, as many are doing here right now, but I have nothing to do with the actual issue.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 0 points 5 days ago (2 children)

So, to me it's weird that there's such a large number of people (probably over 50% of the responses) that reacted to this by saying that it makes perfect sense. That's strange to me, I want to understand it, and I don't really. One possibility though like I mentioned is that people are deliberately trying to stir up shit between the instances for whatever reason. And then, out of the couple dozen people who happened to weigh in, up pops up your username, and you have a history of dishonest participation and trying to stir up shit. That coincidence is notable to me. Doesn't necessarily mean it means anything, it's just interesting. That's what I was saying.

Sorry if you took some (reasonable) offense to me calling you out by name. If it helps you understand it, maybe you could imagine that I changed my profile to say that I'm known for my defiant stand against weird bad-faith participation, and I'm still standing proud and won't be silenced!

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Thanks for the detailed reply. My defense is simple: if you check my history in the Ye Power Trippin' Bastards community, you’ll see I’m a regular commenter there. I even recently posted there.

I wouldn’t even know about the situation you're referring to, if it hadn’t been posted there first, and then picked up in discussion; conspiracies and all.

As far as I know, you’re the first person who ever brought my name into it. I only commented in the thread where it was being discussed. I’ve never posted in the community in question (the AI mushrooms or whatever it’s called), and I’ve had zero interaction with the people involved.

But here’s what happens when you attach my name to this stuff: people see it and go, “Oh! Universal Monk is involved!” They won’t look deeper, they’ll just remember the name and link it to drama. And that fuels this exaggerated, ongoing narrative about how supposedly “terrible” I am for Lemmy.

If you look back, the original hate I got was over posting news articles people didn’t like.

What’s happening now is way worse than anything I've ever done. I’ve been seeing Nazi-level comments, open transphobia, people mocking alcoholics, and the person from the original feud creating alts to spread outright hate.

You’ve made it clear over time that you dislike me and my posts. That’s fine.

But I’m still here, and proud of it. And no, I won't leave. Honestly, the days when I was considered the “villain” feel almost tame compared to the toxicity we’re seeing now. I’ve seen calls for murder, war, hate, bigotry. Those are the real trolls.

In fact, a large chunk of the people who bullied me and said I was a bot, horrible for lemmy, etc aren't even around anymore. They didn't quit because of me. Lemmy in general is become more and more hateful.

Me posting articles about third parties, and articles from all over the political spectrum and viewpoints, even from Breitbart or Newsweek or Fox News, is nothing close to what the person you are talking about has done.

That person legit made fun of a mod for being trans and being a recovering addict. I'm seeing more and more of that crap all over. Show any comment from me where I have said anything close to stuff like that.

You don't have to listen to me, maybe you have blocked me and won't even see this, but I am not every single thing that annoys you on Lemmy. Just because someone is doing something you don't like, that doesn't mean it's me.

I'll be honest. I am not a fan of you either, BUT you are always pretty logical and methodical in your posts. I appreciate that. But the few times I see you falling away from that logic and your good informative posts, while giving away to emotion, is when you bring my name up.

Dude, we don't have to be in an eternal war of words.

We can move this to DM's if you would prefer, so we don't have to bore everyone. Or we can stay here, I'm fine either way.

But I am not the enemy of Lemmy. And my socialist and anarchist posts and articles far outweigh any other types of posts I've posted.

I am not destroying Lemmy. Hate is destroying Lemmy.

I’m proud I didn’t get bullied off Lemmy just for believing in third-party advocacy before the election. And I still believe in it. And yep, I wear those words with pride in my profile.

You’re obviously free to keep on hating me, but at this point, it feels less like fair criticism and more like personal bias.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If you look back, the original hate I got was over posting news articles people didn’t like.

I’m proud I didn’t get bullied off Lemmy just for believing in third-party advocacy before the election.

Look, I get what you're saying, it all sounds perfectly reasonable. But here's the thing: You're still not really acknowledging what the original issue was, why people might have got upset to this unnecessary apocalyptic level. You're sounding all reasonable and friendly about it, but you're still being deceptive at the end of the day. Maybe deceptive to yourself too, so you'll not really know even what I am talking about here, it's crazy and unfriendly, makes no sense, because all you were doing was posting news articles people didn't like, and randomly you got all of this violent hate, out of nowhere, for no reason.

Honestly, I think you know that's not how it happened.

I think I told you this before: To me I would be really good for you to just admit what the original issue was, and if it makes you the bad guy, that's okay in that instance, because it's reality. That's a good thing. Growing or looking back on your previous behavior in a bad light is a sign of something really positive. It's painful as hell sometimes, sure, that too. I'm not trying to come down on you, give you a hard time, anything like that, and maybe I do too much in general or I'm too careless about it. Honestly most of the reason I do that is because I tried to talk to you about it from a standpoint of being actually real, and you didn't want that, and so my reaction is "okey dokey buddy never mind." But the point is, making a bunch of innocuous math and fitness posts to turn over a new leaf and being friendly with your presentation is easy. Actually stepping back in a sense of honesty and saying "Yeah that was messed up, I shouldn't have (whatever), I get what people were saying" is a lot more hard.

It's up to you if you want to do that, don't just say it to say it if you feel like nothing critical of you had any validity because everything you did (or everything you're still doing, I have no idea, I haven't checked) was awesome and right. If it bugs you that people have a negative reaction to you -- and it seems like it does -- that's the answer. Just be real.

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

You're still not really acknowledging what the original issue was, why people might have got upset to this unnecessary apocalyptic level.

Cuz I’m still not sure what the original accusation was supposed to be. I think some people assumed I was pretending to advocate for third parties, but secretly voting for Trump. But that never made sense. Even if every single person who voted third party had instead voted for Harris, she still would’ve lost. The math doesn’t support the blame.

And let’s be real, those same people also claimed I would disappear right after the election. Yet here I am, still active, still advocating for third parties, and still posting socialist content all over Lemmy.

If I were actually a secret Trump supporter, why would I keep doing that? The election is over. I could drop the act and just post pro-Trump stuff openly if that was really my angle. People already assume that anyway. So why would I keep pushing socialist parties and alternative movements now? It doesn’t add up. Unless maybe I actually believe what I’m saying. And I do.

because all you were doing was posting news articles people didn't like

It's not my fault people didn't like them. Is there some rule that I can only post articles that people like? I posted from all different sources on all different political opinions. And I still do that. The vast majority is socialist and green though.

My entire post history is public: @Universalmonk@lemmy.world, @universalmonk@sh.itjust.works and my main name which is @universalmonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com.

Hundreds of articles on socialist, libertarian, conservative, anarchist, green parties. Why do you pick the ones you don't like and assume that's the ones that I represent? Why would I post all the others if I were just the one you don't like? What would be the point in that. My socialist and anarchist article links outnumber any conservative/libertarian article links.

and if it makes you the bad guy, that's okay in that instance

I have no problem with being the bad guy. As you pointed out, I put it in my profile. My profile pic is a list of shit people say about me. So why would I hide my motives? I stand by everything I say and do. Always have. I've never shied away from it.

Why are you failing to admit that the real reason people are mad is because they thought that my support for the Green Party and the Socialist party was to undermine the Democratic Party? But if that were true, why would I continue to support them after the election? Why would I volunteer for those orgs? And donate money to them? Jus to stick it to Lemmy?! Is that you what you actually think? Come on now, use logic.

Yeah that was messed up, I shouldn't have (whatever), I get what people were saying" is a lot more hard.

Because I don't feel that way. It's not my problem you are mad that the democrats lost. Had nothing to do with me or me posting on Lemmy. Lemmy isn't that important in the real world.

Why don't you admit all the people who accused me of being russian, being paid to post on Lemmy, being a paid informant for Trump, or that I would disappear after the election, were wrong? How come those people aren't apologizing or admitting they were wrong?

Lemmy is much more open to third parties now. Honestly, if I reposted every single thing I posted before the election, it wouldn't even be a blip on Lemmy these days.

If it bugs you that people have a negative reaction to you -- and it seems like it does

Well, I'll point it out, but to say it "bugs" me is a bit of a stretch. Again, look at my profile, I put the negative comments in my profile and call myself the notorious Lemmy outlaw who refused to bow to the duopoly.

And I still refuse to bow down the duopoly. I won't vote democrat or republican in our next elections either. I'll vote socialist, just like I always have. Just like I always will.

Just be real.

I have been, and that's why you get so emotional about it. I think that it would be easier for you to accept that I was part of some grand conspiracy because it fits your skewed view of motivations.

The reality is I lean libertarian-socialist, and I like to post links to articles with many different points of views. I'll post whatever I think is interesting, regardless of what Lemmy thinks of the sources.

You can sit there and mock my fitness comms, and my math comms, but I'm adding content to Lemmy. And sticking to my beliefs. No matter how mad it makes Lemmy.

Feel free to see !politicsunfiltered@sh.itjust.works I'm still posting all the different articles that I find interesting. I'm also not going to stop posting college stuff, math stuff, satanist stuff, UFO stuff, workout stuff, or socialist and anarchist stuff to those communities that I have started and maintain on Lemmy.

And now on Piefed. :)

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Cuz I’m still not sure what the original accusation was supposed to be.

Got it. Okay, I tried.

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Well other than people think that I was trying to undermine the democrats by advocating third party. But I have given lots and lots of proof of how that wasn't so.

Is it something else? Here's what annoys me about your posts. You never just come out and say it.

So let's put it out in the open: Why do you think I posted stuff advocating third parties, which at the time were Libertarian, Socialist, and Green?

I don't wanna hear about sealioning or that I didn't back down, or the theory that I had 1,340 alt names, lived in Russia, etc.

No, I wanna hear from you, in front of everyone, why you, PhilipTheBucket thinks I advocated for voting third party. And if that would be nearly as controversial today as it was before the election.

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 2 points 4 days ago

I've went ahead and DM'd you so we can continue this conversation. Based on you bringing my name up here, good chance someone will try to get me banned from here soon. Which is fine, but I'd like to carry on the conversation. I appreciate your logic, but not your conclusions about me.

[–] SereneSadie@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Man, someone going around harassing mods by making 'fake pictures' of them.

Gee, I wonder what they could possibly be using to make those fake pictures, huh.

Glass houses.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Next you'll be telling this mod isn't actually an unhinged alcoholic foot fetishist loser or whatever else they accused her of...

(I feel like asking for ideological consistency of the trolls is asking way too much, they're just not operating on that level even)

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

So lazy to use AI to try to change public opinion.

Real trolls use memes.

Good work sniffing this out, I'm done with blahaj so I was only seeing the db0 side

People should know and remember there are always troll campaigns being ran in most social media spaces with any significant user base.

A couple of other current campaigns I've noticed across social media:

  • an ongoing attempt to frame antizionism as antisemitism

  • terfs attempting to sow division between trans people and the LGB part of the LGBTQIA+ community.

  • terfs attempting to sow division between trans men and women

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah. It is hard to tell the difference between people just being dysfunctional in a way that will cause pointless strife because they are dysfunctional, and people being dysfunctional in a way that will cause pointless strife because they are planning out how to cause pointless strife. I do agree with you that my guess is that at least some of it is that second thing.

It's sort of mind-boggling to me that no one involved in this "in authority" on the dbzer0 side seems responsive to the idea that this is a bad idea, will make their instance look bad, and also won't do anything to solve the harassment of the mod (will in fact make it worse).

But whatever ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Db0 has been making some questionable moderation decisions recently

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 5 points 6 days ago

Yeah. It doesn't come across as malicious to me FWIW. I feel like people are just tribal, and there's this incredibly strong impulse to stand up for "your tribe" be it the anarchists, or the trans people, or whatever, whenever you perceive that they're being attacked or mistreated. Maybe that's it, maybe it's just that it's such a minor issue that the admins don't feel like getting involved, who knows.

I feel like just like separation of church and state, there should be separation of instance and tribal grouping. Like no making an instance that's only for anarchists, only for the Marxists, officially anti-AI or pro-AI, or what have you. It seems like in practice it has been a tailor-made formula for producing drama with other instances. In general you notice the regional instances, they don't have stuff like this come up, it's just "hey we're the Canadian people come join us."

[–] PatrickStar@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

There was someone who talked about this in fedilore a few weeks back, but they got dismissed because everyone thought it was an isolated incident. Those people look stupid now in my opinion.

[–] andyburke@fedia.io 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hang on, you're telling me I can be randomly banned from AI communities?

How do I get my name on the list for sure? I don't want to have to just hope the randomness gods smile on me.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You could just block them you know.

I have no interest in communities dedicated to female celebrities. When they started cropping up, I blocked them (well until I found out it was mostly one user creating the communities and then posting to them, so I just blocked them, but... Same result).

Its pretty easy, about two clicks typically.

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You could just block them you know.

Amazing how many on Lemmy refuse to do that, and instead just complain. lol

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Why block when you can harass! That's more sane and normal, right?

[–] UniversalMonk@quokk.au 3 points 4 days ago

Right? And as for the people accusing me of sealioning, that is one of the most made-up, fake terms I have ever seen.

I had literally never even heard the word sealioning until someone threw it at me on Lemmy. I had to have it explained to me multiple times, and even after reading the definition, I still don't think it is a real thing.

I'm not that smart. So when I ask, "What does that mean?" it's because I genuinely do not know. But somehow, just asking basic questions gets me accused of sealioning.

I still remember the first time it happened. And then I asked what sealioning was, and my question got removed for sealioning. Lol. Good times.

And that goofy cartoon people always post to explain it still makes no sense in ninety percent of the cases where I see the term thrown around.

[–] andyburke@fedia.io 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I was hoping I wouldn't need to do any work and the AI people would just automatically save me from them.

Guess AI disappoints yet again...

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

I don't think being banned prevents it from showing up on your feed. Best to block as you scroll.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago

They might ban you preemptively, actually.

I'm just saying you have a readily available tool at your fingertips, which you could use rather than just complain about the existence of a community you apparently haven't even seen.

[–] floo@retrolemmy.com 12 points 1 week ago

Also, UniversalMonk is involved, because of course he is.

Ugh, the cancer of the fediverse

load more comments
view more: next ›