this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2024
38 points (81.7% liked)

Ye Power Trippin' Bastards

1631 readers
2 users here now

This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.

Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.


Posting Guidelines

All posts should follow this basic structure:

  1. Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
  2. What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
  3. Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
  4. Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
  5. Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.

Rules


Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.

Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.

YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.


Some acronyms you might see.


Relevant comms

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I mean, is "Deny, Defend, Depose" equivalent of "Let's kill [Person]"?

To me it seems more of a "It'd be a shame if [Person] died" and not a direct threat. So do y'all personally think its considered a direct threat? And how would a court of law (in the US) see the phrase "Deny, Defend, Depose"?

I'm asking because I've seen a number of comments removed for that phrase, including one of mine.

all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] inv3r510n@lemmy.world 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It’s free speech. There’s no target. It’s not like we’re saying “deny defend despose [person]”.

And to turn the table, actually denying and delaying (supposedly another word on the bullets) healthcare kills people, but it’s ok when the rich kill the poor. Two justice systems, one for them and one for us.

Fuck the elites.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Corporations sentencing the poor to death in a regular and normalized fashion advocates violence. It's a pretty wild standard.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is legal to say, in plain English, "I hope that fucker dies." Hope is not an actionable threat.

Internet forums need to chill the fuck out about users being angry at bastards in power. Have you looked outside lately? A sigh of relief is completely reasonable, when they are no longer a problem. I didn't do it. You didn't do it. We're both free to be glad it happened. However it happened. Not much seems to be stopping these bastards - and their gleeful abuse is already life-and-death for people who can only cling to hope.

You can still forbid rando-on-rando vitriol. You can still boot Nazis demanding violence toward innocent strangers. There's no hypocrisy in having a moral opinion. Certainly not when it amounts to 'bigotry is bad, actually' or 'DickButkis123 can only harm you emotionally.' It is simply not the same situation as being the face of watching your wife die slowly from lack of paperwork.

Hypocrisy is when you tolerate grand defenses of Israel, when they kill thousands indiscriminately (or very discriminately), but censor mere apathy over one guy.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

Totally agree with this. I haven't seen a single post about this topic that needed removing imo, let alone banning people for it. Let ordinary folks enjoy the death of some rich bastard (who totally deserved it) in peace.

[–] theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, in the same way saying you wish someone had to get healthcare in America is, or saying you hope justice exists is.

The problem you're having is the instance you're posting on that is removing your comments thinks all violence done by poor people is bad, so it's against their tos. They have no problem with violence done by the rich, that's not against their tos.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 4 points 1 year ago

Regime whores got exposed again...

[–] Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 year ago

Is “Delay, Deny, Defend”?

It’s a call to cause mass death for those who rely on health insurance to survive.

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago

It's a rallying cry.

A slogan.

Nothing more.

People are free to extrapolate from it what they wish.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Watts v. United States suggests no.

[–] Fandangalo@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People are saying it’s related to a book by a similar or same title (depending on the reporting of the 3rd word). The book is about health care being a scam, so seems to be a rallying cry to read the book and unseat traditional “health care” in America.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 1 year ago

Parasite class should be never allowed to fele comfortable.

Let them go to their bunker in new Zealand

[–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nobody got mad about advocating violence when the entire US was demanding war after 9/11.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 3 points 1 year ago

Well the regime was stocking the war so obviously...

Here the regime doesn't like us gloating over one off their officers being destroyed by a folk hero.

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The word depose, in and of itself, simply means to remove from power, dethrone, or acquire information (such as a witness is deposed).

It does not inherently contain within its meaning an act of violence.

The word is completely neutral and cannot be assumed to be a call for violence.

To depose a witness does not mean to violently force them to provide information.

To depose a CEO is done frequently by the boards they head.

Though, like many things, the methodology of action cannot be assumed by the word alone.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago

Depose in this context means putting someone in front of a lawyer and grilling them in preparation for a lawsuit.

In the current context? Yeah, it kind of does mean that.

I'm not sure what a judge or jury would infer from that in the US, as it could be fucking anything. Probably has a lot to do with why you're in court and what, exactly, it is you did that landed you in front of a judge but I wouldn't really expect you'd be arrested or whatever for JUST saying that.

[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

It's the playbook that health insurance companies use to save money. How is that advocating violence?

Deny the claim.

Defend the decision.

...and technically I think the third one should be Delay. As in delay for as long as possible.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

It's not a direct threat, but it is definitely advocating violence in the same way that "wouldn't it be a shame if" does.

It's not a direct call to action, but you're definitely saying it should happen.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

Plenty of ways to Deny, Defend, Depose without killing. It doesn't condone killing, but it shouldn't be that difficult to empathize with Luigi, specially in a country that seems to be very good at finding other reasons to condone killing legally and officially.