People's Court

493 readers

1 users here now

This is a community for Lemmygrad users and admins to discuss administrative issues in a more transparent manner

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

felipeforte@lemmygrad.ml

GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml

"rojava should be wiped off the map by HTS" (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 3 months ago by multitotal@lemmygrad.ml to c/lemmygrad_court@lemmygrad.ml

48 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I reported that, but no action was taken.

Calling for ethnic cleansing of Kurds at the hands of Islamic fascists should be against the rules... right?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Funny how multitotal didn't actually link the thread directly, just quoted one comment without context. Almost like they're trying to start drama or do wrecker shit by trying to turn the community against the mods.

[–] MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 3 months ago

"Link to what you're criticizing" should be a rule for posts like this.

[–] muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I get that people get hot about this one, and its not necessarily a bad thing to make a people's court post about stuff like this. We always gotta be open to criticism.

[–] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm fine with people bringing up a discussion they think is unacceptable, but to do so without posting links to it is just pointless drama, or deliberate wrecker behaviour.

[+] multitotal@lemmygrad.ml -6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I didn't want it to seem like I'm asking for people to go and jump on the discussion.

It's interesting though that people are all like "context?" in response to this, but if someone had written "I hope China gets wiped off the map", they'd be instantly banned for "imperialism" (rightfully so) and nobody would pause for two seconds to ask for context. Same thing with any of the other n things where the mere implication of a thought rather than anything written is worthy of a permanent ban.

But when someone says, in no uncertain terms, they wish Turkey and its militias ethnically cleanse the Kurds from northern Syria the response is "hm.. what is the context of that statement?" LMAO

[–] redtea@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Just to be clear, genocide and similar crimes are never acceptable in any context.

The context that I was asking for is the context in which the words in the thread title/description were stated. This was not to make assumptions about the context in which advocating for genocide is okay. It was to avoid making incorrect assumptions and accepting your interpretation without evidence. It was not too see whether the context might suggest that genocide was acceptable. It was to determine whether anyone had advocated for the genocide of Kurds.

[–] multitotal@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 3 months ago

Maybe I didn't link it publicly so it wouldn't seem like I am trying to start drama with the person. I didn't ask for the person to get banned or their comment deleted, just asked about that rule going forward.