New Carnivore Community does not like opposing opinions
https://feddit.org/post/13994826/7165181
Everything I downvoted was because I genuinely do not think it's good. Like meat is not going to cure cancer.
I actually really like eating meat I just try to life a life that gives others room to enjoy this earth too without mutually destroying it.
Please tell me how I am the asshole :)
You're viewing a single thread.
YDI.
If you go around down voting everything, that's not acting in good faith. Down voting the post, yeah, that's one thing and it's perfectly fine to down vote posts that are (to your best knowledge) misinformation.
The problem starts when you go into comment sections and down vote everything. See, if you're doing that, it's ignoring whether or not the comments are on for the post. Disagreement isn't a valid reason to vote bomb an entire comment section. That's what an asshole does.
Now, I have done plenty of down voting in that community. But no blanket knee jerk vote sprees. That's where you cross from reasonable opposition into just trying to fuck with people.
It doesn't even matter what the topic is for this community. It isn't about validating or invalidating your opinion of subject, it's about whether or not the mod action was justified based on your actions. And they absolutely were.
That was the only comment I voted on. Because I did not see the person being helpful based on their posts. I did not vote spree the other comment sections. I did vote on the posts... I would not call that downvoting of posts in the community kneejerk. The statement the mod gave is not true I checked to make absolutely sure.
Thank you for elaborating though.
Everything I downvoted was because I genuinely do not think it's good.
That's what you said in your post. Everything implies that you voted on more than one thing.
I'm not sure why you would down vote multiple posts instead of blocking a community, but it does change things a little as long as it wasn't blanket voting where you just went through and hit the down button arbitrarily on a long line of posts. If that's what you were doing, it doesn't change the YDI part, because that's inevitably going to get you banned from any community at some point. The question would become one of threshold; how many did you arbitrarily down vote rather than the fact of doing it at all.
If you just down voted them as you came across them scrolling the all feed, you'd only have hit maybe five or six based on the slow posting of that community. So, if it's more than that, you had to have gone to the community directly specifically to down vote, and that's pretty shitty behavior, ban worthy at that.
If it was less than that, then jet absolutely power tripped. You can't determine the intent of the user from less than a handful of votes, particularly if they're recent posts.
But, hey, that's what this community is about, figuring out where the boundaries of what lemmy as a whole consider acceptable mores of moderation and user behavior.
No I did go to the community to check it out, that part tracks, yes I downvoted a few posts. The cooking stuff I downvoted I also do not agree with (the beef chart excludes the head from the edible parts, the ribeye cooling one is in my opinion way over the top, a simple cast iron skillet does the job. The blended steak, meat bagels and meat cinnamon rolls I don't think are a good idea. The brisquet price comparison I also do not agree with as I think that price does not make that big of a difference in comparison to the way to cook it, but on that one I definitely get how I should have been more open minded).
I think the interesting part is wether I should be allowed to be in opposition on most of a community or not. I think that we are a community on Lemmy as a whole and that it is ok to discuss things. I can still see why brigading is problematic. Then it comes down to the definition of good faith which is arguable and there it is interesting wether there can be good faith in participating in a community whilst being opposed to the main lines. I am not even in fundamental opposition about eating (and enjoying!) meat so I would have guessed that I acted in good faith. I guess I could see why jet did get offended and I guess I take a more lenient approach on the two Comms I mod. That being said there is probably significantly less contestation around the communities I mod.
Assuming honesty in all that (and that is what I'm assuming, no reason to do otherwise), I definitely call that good faith. Absolutely.
I also tend to think that opposition can be done with respect and decency (with the glaring exception of bigotry that deserves no respect, but that's off topic and I only mention it to hopefully avoid the watabouts). I think my opposition to some of the posts and comments in the carnivore communities have been done respectfully, I've at least tried to be respectful.
Mind you, it's been a while since I interacted much there, since I've pretty much said all I can say without beating a dead horse, which I prefer to avoid.
Also, I really appreciate the way you've approached this entire discussion here. A lot of folks just want validation of their emotional response to whatever mod action they're posting about, so it's really cool when people fully engage in wrangling with the broader subject of how to approach moderation and user interactions with mods. At risk of going off topic, this community has changed my approach to moderation both on and off lemmy. I've learned a lot here about when to act quickly and decisively, and when to take a more gentle approach.
That being said there is probably significantly less contestation around the communities I mod.
That's fair, I'm happy to unban you if I have your word that you will be less hostile going forward. Yes - I consider downvoting to be hostility
The Carnivore community gets lots of negative attention, right now we are transitioning to a new instance so all the previous blocks people had don't work and its a sensitive time.
No, if downvotes with things I don't agree with are considered hostile I don't think it's a good idea. I don't think I want to interact with this carnivore sub on an ongoing basis but I was interested in wether general participation on Lemmy regardless of the community is welcomed or if bubble building is the new meta.
Pretty sure any community would consider it hostile if you only downvote and never upvote in that comm
You could probably be just fine down voting only if you did it judiciously. Down voting a weeks worth of posts in a day is always going to look spammy.
Fair enough, i'm glad you have the resolution you wanted from this YPTB post.
The community in question is entirely dedicated to dangerous medical misinformation, their purpose for existence is fundamentally bad-faith and should be drowned in downvotes
I disagree.
While I absolutely question the carnivore diet as a general thing, the way the community is handled has shifted from the way it started. Back in the beginning, I was in the same frame of thought you are, and said so directly in the community (eventually).
But jet in specific, and other users, have shifted to better citations, and a more frequent way of presenting their opinions. I do not believe they engage in misinformation currently. If I believed so, I would be obligated by my personal ethical code to attempt to have admins shut it down. Can't say it would succeed, but I'd have to try.
Since jet in specific is very good about putting in disclaimers that people should approach the diet with care, I definitely can't call it bad faith. Acknowledgement of the diet being limited in scope for the general population is good faith discussion by default.
Again, I definitely disagree with the claims made by some of the people in linked videos. What they recommend doesn't match current best practices, and is usually extrapolated from data that is specific to limited circumstances and applied generally, which is very flawed. There's also non medical issues with attempting a pure carnivorous diet, but I doubt those would be relevant to this.
As such, I still maintain that down voting everything willy nilly is a justifiable reason for bans, which is what this community is about.
If you feel that the community is dangerous, harmful, or otherwise shouldn't be accessible, throwing down votes at everything is not the appropriate method to address the issue. And that's what the post was about, not whether or not the community should exist. If you genuinely feel that strongly about the dangers involved, you should be contacting the admins of the instance and explaining that to them.
absolutely question the carnivore diet as a general thing
I'm sure you have seen enough snippits by now to know all that I know about carnivore. The ketogenic diet is probably the single most studied eating pattern in all the literature (its not that keto is special, its that nutritional research is so very sparse)
Where does the outstanding concern come from? The ketogenic aspect (lack of carbohydrates)? Or fibre? Or vitamin C? I'm happy to try to close the gap.
I even have blood work I can share - nothing is off limits for science.