cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/26218551

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/26218550

(posting to both communities)

A carnist lemmy world instance admin has stepped in and meatsplained to the mods while restoring comments that violated the community’s rules. They deleted comments that they did not agree with, citing ‘misinformation’, and threatened to demod the mods if those comments were removed again. The comments were deleted and the admin was banned from the community as per violating the rules of the community, that was until they unbanned themselves (admin abuse) and unmodded two of the moderators because of “promoting harmfull actions against pets”.

As far as it stands, if the lemmy world community wasn’t already not a safe vegan place for you (it really wasn’t) it most certainly isn’t now as carnists (lemmy world instance admin) currently mod it.

I suggest any vegan who wants a safe and welcoming space to come and interact with vegantheoryclub.org. Sorry for any inconvienance that this may have caused. I am deeply upset at the admins actions today and don’t condone them whatsoever.

  • mozz
    link
    fedilink
    16
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I actually agree in general, but this is like the one time in recent memory I have felt like whole heartedly cheering on the Lemmy.world administration team

    If some other instance wants to scoop up the animal abuse demographic now that they are ejected from .world, I think we will all survive

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Ah yes, its the people that are against harming animals that are the real animal abusers.

      Feeding an animal a nutrionally complete diet: abuse

      killing animals: not abuse

      • @Maalus
        link
        6
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Feeding an obligatory carnivore plants = abuse. End of story.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Even if that was true, you’re still killing other animals which is obviously more harmful/abusive to them than not giving them their favorite food instead of the same nutrients in a different package.

          • @Maalus
            link
            23 months ago

            Yes, one animal dies to feed a different one. That’s how it has always been. Starving a pet because you don’t like the facts of life makes you a bad pet owner, nothing more. No moral highground, just abuse.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              03 months ago

              It’s not abuse to feed an animal a nutritionally complete diet. There is no magical nutrient that exists in animals that cannot be artificially synthesized. Just because you don’t care about animal suffering doesn’t make it necessary or justified.

              • @Maalus
                link
                13 months ago

                I care about animal suffering infinitely more than someone who starves their cat for their beliefs.

      • ilovecheese
        link
        fedilink
        143 months ago

        A philosophy that should not be forced on another animal against their nature.

        There’s some hypocrisy here!

        • @[email protected]OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -123 months ago

          That is the no true scotsman fallacy. I could also say that bringing animals into our homes when they were originally from the wild is the hypocrisy here.

          • ilovecheese
            link
            fedilink
            73 months ago

            You could and would probably have a point.

            But it doesn’t make it ok for you just because someone else did before.

            Your hypocrisy is the point here.

          • @EndlessApollo
            link
            English
            -2
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            You really have no idea what any of the fallacies you throw out there really are do you xD