If people prevent something being used by tons of other people for no good reason, then this would be a very good one to “hold a grudge” against them for.
Do i really have to explain such a simple thing to someone. Holy shit it’s like im on Reddit again.
EDIT: Holy shit i am talking about those morons DDOSing lemmy.world
Lol “no good reason” does not apply to the decisions the Lemmy.world admins have made for which instances to defederate from or what content to allow. They have been very straight forward with those decisions and explaining why.
Not liking their decision doesn’t mean there is “no good reason”.
If people prevent something being used by tons of other people for no good reason, then this would be a very good one to “hold a grudge” against them for.
Are you talking about the DDoSers or the admins of lemmy.world? Because, yes, everyone who is trying to use lemmy.world that can’t should hold a grudge against the skids who bought a DDoS service subscription.
If you’re talking about the admins, you should be more specific. Are you saying that them defederating from another instance is a good reason for that other instance’s users to hold a grudge and DDoS? Because I would bed to differ if that’s the case.
It’s worded confusingly. Let me see if I’m correct here:
If people prevent something being used by tons of other people for no good reason
This is not in reference to the lemmy.world users being prevented from using the instance, but instead is about the possible motivation of said attack
then this would be a very good one to “hold a grudge” against them for.
Continuing on to say that you could understand how a person could hold a grudge over a perceived slight
The way you worded it make it sound like you mean lemmy.world users should hold a grudge against the attackers for preventing them from using lemmy.world, which is why people are confused. It might have been better to say like “The attackers are probably retaliating for being banned or something”
If people prevent something being used by tons of other people for no good reason, then this would be a very good one to “hold a grudge” against them for.
Do i really have to explain such a simple thing to someone. Holy shit it’s like im on Reddit again.
EDIT: Holy shit i am talking about those morons DDOSing lemmy.world
I mean the person doing the DDoS attack is the one with the grudge.
Makes sense
It is like reddit. People without reading comphrension are everywhere.
Lol “no good reason” does not apply to the decisions the Lemmy.world admins have made for which instances to defederate from or what content to allow. They have been very straight forward with those decisions and explaining why.
Not liking their decision doesn’t mean there is “no good reason”.
That’s what i said. I am in favor of defederating from terrorist instances.
You completely misunderstood that reply. Joyjoy was also talking about the DDOSers.
Are you talking about the DDoSers or the admins of lemmy.world? Because, yes, everyone who is trying to use lemmy.world that can’t should hold a grudge against the skids who bought a DDoS service subscription.
If you’re talking about the admins, you should be more specific. Are you saying that them defederating from another instance is a good reason for that other instance’s users to hold a grudge and DDoS? Because I would bed to differ if that’s the case.
I am in favor of lemmy.world
It’s worded confusingly. Let me see if I’m correct here:
This is not in reference to the lemmy.world users being prevented from using the instance, but instead is about the possible motivation of said attack
Continuing on to say that you could understand how a person could hold a grudge over a perceived slight
The way you worded it make it sound like you mean lemmy.world users should hold a grudge against the attackers for preventing them from using lemmy.world, which is why people are confused. It might have been better to say like “The attackers are probably retaliating for being banned or something”