This is a serious problem for y’all, I know you removed him as a site wide moderator, but it is simply not enough. You are endorsing someone who has a CLEAR pattern of silencing discussion about a particular group of people and if that doesn’t alarm you, you need to wake up and pay attention.

Looking back there is a repeated pattern of removing, silencing and acting derisively towards discussion about Palestine and the Palestinian Genocide from Jordan Lund both from my interactions with him and also from others I have found easily from searching.

Deal with this problem.

See this post

https://sopuli.xyz/post/42491951

…and this post.

https://sopuli.xyz/post/42630105

  • BlameTheAntifa
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    They also hold the opinion that the only valid news sources are corporate and billionaire-owned news sources. They are a danger to the fediverse.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      See my linked posts for an exhaustive argument with sourced links and context. If you have any questions please ask.

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          What part needs to be elaborated? Ok I will format a comment if you want it just feels like copying and pasting into a format that loses even more context.

          Futher, I am not sure I trust having a conversation with y’all here? Lemmy World needs to prove to me they won’t silence me because they don’t want to have a discussion about this before I invest time carefully wording and formatting a post here just for it to get silenced/removed.

          I know this is a big headache for them, it would be so much easier to just call me a shrill troll who isn’t genuine in their beliefs at all and just wants to stir the pot, and that makes me extremely wary to invest my time making a point here in a way someone like Jordan Lund can flick with a finger and make go away.

          When they do I will absolutely put in the effort of moving that kind of discussion over here, but until then sorry I just do not see proof of trust.

          For now I refer you to the abundant links I gave that cannot be directly removed, silenced or taken down by Lemmy.World mods.

          edit ok let me begin my conversation here with a quote from Jordan Lund

          Please review the posts you had removed and explain how these are, in ANY way US Politics:

          https://www.newarab.com/news/israel-replicating-its-gaza-war-tactics-lebanon

          Any mention of US personnel? Policy? Politicians? No? Goes in World. Not Politics.

          https://dawnmena.org/destroying-al-shifa-hospital-robin-andersens-the-complicity-lens-us-media-coverage-of-israels-genocide-in-gaza/

          What the US media does or does not do is also NOT politics. Again, appropriate for World, not Politics.

          https://www.alai.info/en/corporate-participation-and-complicity-in-the-genocide-against-the-palestinian/

          Similarly, what US corporations do is not Politics. World please.

          https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/there-no-ceasefire-gaza

          You are correct, there is no cease fire in Gaza, who is doing the shooting? Israel.

          None of these stories are remotely similar to stories about US mercenaries taking action in Gaza. That’s why they were removed from Politics.

          https://lemmy.world/comment/22677703


          …and so I open this conversation with a question to you, do you earnestly believe this is a functional, well adjusted way to moderate a Politics community? Can this strategy and way of understanding politics possibly work even outside the thorny question of US-Israel politics?

          • lmmarsano@group.lt
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            23 hours ago

            An explicit argument consists of citing the relevant rules, stating how they’ve been violated, and providing evidence. It shows you’ve done the bare minimum to show your claim is plausible. This is in everyone’s interest, especially yours as the interested party.

            As basic advocacy, an explicit argument should be expected: if you’re unable to articulate a decent argument, then how can you expect others to do so for you? Leaving that guesswork to others may not necessarily work in your favor. Do you really want to leave the best argument to chance & the unreliable charity of others?

            An objective, sound argument may draw popular support by convincing them your claim is legitimate & just and demands action regardless of where admin decision ultimately settles. Not attempting one, however, draws all of it into question.

            • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              I have, on the threads I linked, why should I trust my posts to be moderated in good faith here? It is obviously apparent at least some of Lemmy World staff are friendly with Jordan Lund, this is likely messy af for Lemmy World admin.

              I have provided abundance evidence, so have others.

              I provided the bulk of the evidence on a third party community for a reason, and it is perfectly rational.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      At this point what does a private conversation mean to everyone else who cares? I am just another loud annoying voice.

      I want a public conversation NOT hosted on Lemmy World where people are publicly held accountable.

        • Pinto, the Bean
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          22 hours ago

          You can’t talk about someone publicly for their public actions, that’s too mean.

          You can banish users for talking too much about what mods don’t like, that’s fair game.

      • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Because if you haven’t bothered to follow the internal process for that instance, then you’re just stirring shit, no matter how bad lund is.

        Apparently the admins are fine with your post, so I’m fine with it too. Just saying that shit stirring is a pain in the ass and if you want to actually try to get a change made, you don’t start off by ignoring the established avenues of action.

        It’s just a bad idea to essentially flip off the very admins that would be the ones to take any action when trying to get them to do so. People have limited patience for fuckery to begin with.

        You do you I guess. But being real, this kind of thing is more likely to end up with people blocking you the same way they have lund and then what have you achieved? Nothing.

    • kreskin
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Why dont you give us all a rest by posting your boring and abusive take someplace else. Looks like you are running interference for mod abuse so you should be banned along with Lund.

    • Pinto, the Bean
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      23 hours ago

      When he actually get removed for breaking rules that the admins have said he needs to stop breaking, sure.