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.
But you didn't ask the user how he got it! Surely before claiming that he is full of shit, you could have spent ~10 seconds typing out, "what is your source?" I didn't see you do that in piefed thread.
BLZ can do whatever, but others are also allowed to make their own conclusions about the possible reasons for the lack of transparency.
They're the only person in this thread trying to sow division and call the Blahaj admins decision into question, besides you of course. I don't need to assume the best intentions in that case, and can draw my own conclusions. As a trans person, if I gave everyone the benefit of the doubt all of the time, I'd expose myself to far too much hatred.
If you want to choose to believe the reason is anything other than "to prevent brigading" than that's up to you. feddit.uk admins seem to know the context, like I said before, so I don't see how Ada could be lying here...
You're welcome to assume bad faith or not bother, it's your right.
The fact remains, you don't know whether Pondercat is full of shit or not. You don't have any evidence and you are not interested in interacting with Pondercat.
"Prevent brigading” is irrelevant at this point, the text is out, so you cannot prevent brigading if it's real. So the question about transparency remains.
Pointing out clear lapses in logic is not "sowing division".
Have you actually followed the link above? It says "I think these are [the comments]".
~~I never said anything here was "sowing division", please attribute that quote properly?~~ (Edit: Apologies, I got my comment threads confused) While you're at it, care to explain how preventing brigading is "a clear lapse of logic" because there are plenty of other people in this thread that understood and even lauded that decision. Or don't bother? I'm not going to keep engaging with you.
I have, yes. Nothing about the statement implies Pondercat is full of shit (i.e. lying).
Because if the text is correct, the argument that you want to prevent brigading isn't relevant anymore. If the text is incorrect and one is concerned about brigading, then one would openly let everyone know that Pondercat has the wrong text.