-16
The fact you can't tell anyone to go f themselves online anymore without getting banned is absurd and sad
(self.casualconversation)
this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
-16 points (36.7% liked)
Casual Conversation
3170 readers
666 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The idea is to have freedom of expression AND to exercise it intelligently. It isn't an either-or. Or it shouldn't be.
Sure. thats not what OP is saying in their post though
It's implied. Nobody wants assholes.
Most people generally consider those who habitually reach for "fuck you" to be assholes.
Perhaps that's the problem.
Most of the people that I've met who habitually reach for "fuck you", frame it as a question or an argument. Which is arguably worse. And somewhat common. Well, common in the conversations that I like to have.
And yet it seems most people avoid spaces that have the conversations you like to have.
Here, try an experiment. Run a Lemmy server with the rule that you can say what you like within the bounds of law. See how many users come to your space. I'll bet for sure you'll be bigger than even lemmy.world what with all the people who want to habitually reach for "fuck you" that are being so unnecessarily repressed by so-called civil society!
You'll sure show us, won't you!
See, now you are saying "fuck you", and framing it all snarky, "You’ll sure show us, won’t you!". That's actually worse than "fuck you".
I think that the problem might actually be bullshit. There's a ton of "fuck you" going around but it's disguised, so it can't be rationally addressed, but we still feel it, the awfulness, so to escape the awfulness we subconsciously slide into these safe conversations, where conflict and the invisible yet toxic fallout don't exist. But the safe conversations are not very satisfying.
So you're saying that a Lemmy instance that will let anybody casually reach for profane abuse isn't going to succeed?
Wow. What an own goal!
Please do go on. Just go on without me. It's pretty clear you're exactly the kind of person I dropped Twitter over (and the kind of person that had me never even bother with festering pools of dysentery effluent like Reddit). We shan't be talking again.
(P.S. Please do go on a binge of downvoting all my posts. You'll sure show me with that! I won't even slightly hold it up as a badge of honour, I promise!)
You are saying "fuck you" like 3 times there. I can see how you might feel cynical.
just swearing at someone isn’t expressing it intelligently though
Sometimes it is. It depends.