That post explicitly says it's not a place for debate or participation from users of other instances.
I'd like to respect that but I think events like this need debate and discussion because it helps to develop and evolve the culture of lemmy and the fediverse in general.
The post says:
This post is "FYI only" for blahaj lemmy members. It is not a debate, and is not intended for non blahaj lemmy users to weigh in and offer opinions.
I recently received reports of a feddit.uk user espousing transphobia. Specifically, this was a feddit.uk user refusing to use the word cis, repeating the "adult human female" dog whistle, and claiming that trans women are not women. I approached a member of the feddit.uk admin team and raised my concerns and sought clarification of their stance on posts like this, where the transphobia is mostly dogwhistles, and "civil disagreement" on the validity of trans folk.
I was told by the feddit.uk admin that their preferred response is this kind of transphobia is to "sort it out through discussion and voting". However, the comments in question are currently more upvoted than downvoted, and little "sorting out" has occurred. The posts remain in place.
At this point, the admin stopped responding to my messages despite being active elsewhere on lemmy. When it became clear they were ignoring my messages and had no intention of removing the posts in question, I made the decision to defederate the instance.
I know some folk agree with the feddit.uk admins approach of pushback through discussion and voting, but this instance is not designed to be that kind of space. Blahaj lemmy is meant to be a place where we can avoid the rampant transphobia universally visible on nearly every other social media platform, and where we can exist without needing to debate our right to do so.
Banning people who were never active on your instance and applying pressure on other instances to ban users is nothing wrong?
I am all for trans rights (see my recent post about nonsensical UK supreme Court judgement) and this is not the way to support these.
You keep saying it over and over but the downvotes and the vast majority of replies every single time you complain disagree.
Remind me, how did that post of yours here go? Was it... -18? Were the comments overwhelmingly telling you to stuff it? Sure seems that way.
And yet all you do is continue to say the same garbage over and over. You're allowed to say that this isn't how you support trans people. But the people of blahaj disagree. You can complain that this is power tripping. But the people of YPTB disagree. You can whine that legitimate complaints are being silenced on YPTB. But the people of dbzer0 disagree. Which is why we asked to put a stop to the "waaa I was banned by Ada" posts.
That's not true. The first post by HAL-5700X is at +29 / - 56, so about a third agree.
Kolanaki's following statement:
is at +33 / -29 and that's without the text that prompted the defederation being revealed in this thread.
https://sh.itjust.works/post/36737764/18213591
If the text was available, chances are the reaction might have been very different.
Even FauxLiving's post stating the following (exert, not the full post) is at +18 / - 30.
A large minority of YPTB aren't aligned with your opinion.
🔥
Also, just want to mark it down that we can still rely on up vote down vote numbers. Enjoy it while it lasts once threat actors arrive, it is gonna be reddit astroturf
Not sure what you are referring to.
I am pointing out that there is a decent amount of pushback, both in voting and comments. The framing that the whole (or even an overwhelming majority) of YPTB is aligned with a single view is factually incorrect.
I agreed with your a analysisand made a comment about how upvotes and downvotes still have meaning on fedi... For now
Ah, I see. Cheers!
I can cherry pick shit too!
Like db0 saying "Good decision by Ada" which is up 61, down 2! Or Noel_Skum, "How are people still struggling with the basic concept that the person who runs Blahaj can do what they want with Blahaj?" Up 54, down 1! Or pixeltree, "That’s why I chose blahaj zone as my instance. It’s nice not having to justify my existence" Or southsamurai! Or LWD! Or me!
Fuck off out of here with that disingenuous garbage.
No, your claim that everyone in YPTB agrees with you is factually incorrect. You could say a solid majority, but not everyone.
All you've shown is that the people who disagree are less inclined to downvote. The vote ranges seem to imply a 1/3 (disagree) vs 2/3 (agree) split.
HAL-5700X had ~60 downvotes, db0 had ~60 upvotes.
There is clearly a strong minority that disagrees. It's no where close to what you're trying to imply.
So out of my entire comment, your response is, "well, it's not 100% of people who feel that way." No shit, Sherlock. Congrats. I'm not going to take the time, and I don't have the resources, to figure out exactly how many of those users are people who qualify for my entire discussion point of "assholes who linger" but two of the three people you just named were banned by Ada and one (the guy I was replying to) is extremely salty about it.
If you're arguing on the side of "assholes who are mad at being banned for transphobic behavior" you should consider that saying nothing at all is free, and arguing semantics in support of assholes is neither necessary or helpful.
No, that is not what I am arguing for.
I am saying a large minority of this forum to do not agree with your views. It's not three people.
I never asked you to start a project to quantify anything. I am just pointing out that your statement "all of YPTB (less three individuals) agrees with me" is factually incorrect. It is not a small minority, that is clear.
Your claim that only people who got banned by BLZ disagree with you is also wrong.
If I had the authority I would do a poll, registered users. We could then see of the people voting which way, who was an was not banned. We don't have that ability or that authority and at this point, it's the kind of hair-splitting BS I'm not interested in.
The umbrage I took was with people like the person I was replying to. The problem I had is with the implication that Ada is why we stopped allowing that type of post. The reason we stopped allowing that type of post stands. The reason that they're mad about being 'censored' stands. You are choosing the fight you want to have with me, and I am choosing not to fight with you. Good day.
Say what now?