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.
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.
Yeah, that’s fair. I only see the interaction put in front of me, what’s been posted, and anything I might catch in certain matrix channels. The only known interaction I had with PTZ directly was a ban and him giving me the finger.
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.
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.
The post was fine, the premise is wrong about the fediverse. That’s why I downvoted and didn’t interact further.
Yeah, not so nice for just downvoting a post of his though. Fediverse is better off without that kind of toxic behaviour.
Mozilla is an ad company now. It happened when they picked up anonym last year. It’s why I use iron fox and librewolf that disable the telemetry by default among other things until ladybird gets closer to ready. Not to mention Mozilla forcing their ToS now to use the base browser on new installs and soon™ for existing users.
Mozilla is prepping for how to replace their income from the Google default search deal. I’m 99% sure it’ll get blown up when the dust settles in the anti-trust case. It’s why they ended a bunch of projects that won’t make any money and branched into a bunch of weird (for them) markets like AI hoping to make money. The only proven to make money thing they are doing so far is ads.
Leaving one ad powered company for another isn’t what I want to do. Fool me once…
Is this race a majority or plurality wins?
Just on the surface, this is probably related to loosing the exclusive contract for Amazon deliveries.
Edit: yup, 2nd paragraph
Clippy still wins though because you could have him duck off.
“Looks like you’re writing a letter”
No I’m not, fuck off Clippy.
Turns out we just hadn’t coined the term for computer intelligence being wrong as hallucinating yet.
I’m getting mission accomplished deja vu.
Am I the only one that reuses plastic bags as trash bags?
My wife’s car? Replaced a few parts over the decade we’ve owned it.
My old truck? Replaced several major parts over the 2 decades I owned it.
Computers? Most of my parts replaced are upgrades, but I’ve replaced a laptop keyboard, a cpu heatsink fan, a power supply, a case, two hard drives, and a dial up modem from a lightning strike all on PCs I’ve personally owned over the course of 30 years that I can remember. I also did warranty repair work for Dell, HP, and Lenovo/IBM in my time as a tech. So many laptop and desktop mainboards…
Don’t sell yourself short. Fixing up a tractor that was free only costs you the time and parts you invested into it. You saved something from being junked and having to buy a working tractor. That alone is worth the endeavor.
I meant in the ToS, but no, troll not my intentions. I thought I was agreeing with you and just expounding on your point.
Just did a cursory search for harm on the YouTube ToS. There is no definition that I saw, but it does say “may cause harm”. So my suspicion that anything could be construed to be harmful to YouTube’s business is likely correct. Quoted sections of the YouTube ToS containing the word “harm” as of 2025-06-06 17:20 GMT.
Removal of Content By YouTube
If any of your Content (1) is in breach of this Agreement or (2) may cause harm to YouTube, our users, or third parties, we reserve the right to remove or take down some or all of such Content in our discretion. We will notify you with the reason for our action unless we reasonably believe that to do so: (a) would breach the law or the direction of a legal enforcement authority or would otherwise risk legal liability for YouTube or our Affiliates; (b) would compromise an investigation or the integrity or operation of the Service; or © would cause harm to any user, other third party, YouTube or our Affiliates. You can learn more about reporting and enforcement, including how to appeal on the Troubleshooting page of our Help Center.
Terminations and Suspensions by YouTube
YouTube reserves the right to suspend or terminate your Google account or your access to all or part of the Service if (a) you materially or repeatedly breach this Agreement; (b) we are required to do so to comply with a legal requirement or a court order; or © we reasonably believe that there has been conduct that creates (or could create) liability or harm to any user, other third party, YouTube or our Affiliates.
Notice for Termination or Suspension
We will notify you with the reason for termination or suspension by YouTube unless we reasonably believe that to do so: (a) would violate the law or the direction of a legal enforcement authority; (b) would compromise an investigation; © would compromise the integrity, operation or security of the Service; or (d) would cause harm to any user, other third party, YouTube or our Affiliates.
About this Agreement
Changing this Agreement We may change this Agreement, for example, (1) to reflect changes to our Service or how we do business - for example, when we add new products or features or remove old ones, (2) for legal, regulatory, or security reasons, or (3) to prevent abuse or harm.
If we materially change this Agreement, we’ll provide you with reasonable advance notice and the opportunity to review the changes, except (1) when we launch a new product or feature, or (2) in urgent situations, such as preventing ongoing abuse or responding to legal requirements. If you don’t agree to the new terms, you should remove any Content you uploaded and stop using the Service.
Exactly, I haven’t read the ToS to see if it is defined or references anything in there. I usually default to the standard definition of a word unless explicitly stated otherwise. For example, Sony changed the definition of purchase to remove any notion of ownership when buying content on their streaming platform.
If harmful isn’t defined in the ToS, then the Merriam Webster definition will likely be construed to mean to be harmful to YouTube’s business or to users. Although YouTube has been selective in this enforcement, ie not banning all videos pertaining to martial arts or fighting clips, drug use, or ad block tutorials.
No
gloveblock, nolovebrowse