1·
11 months agoIn my opinion, lots of posts get removed here which would fall under reasonable (and even important) / valid free speech. So I do think the mods are abusing their censorship ability.
- 29 Posts
- 98 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: December 12th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
I kind of agree with your last sentence… but that’s why I think this platform doesn’t serve that purpose unfortunately lol. Interesting or radical liberal posts seem to get removed a lot.
I wish this site was more like Reddit’s anarchy tbh lol. I see it as essentially a free speech platform aside from extreme cases.
So how do we determine if a question is nonsense? I didn’t realise the questions had to be necessarily important
Hi, I never received a bot message that I was aware of. I thought that the links I posted in the comments were providing examples of what I meant and helping to describe the question. I don’t really understand why it was removed. I can see that this post was also locked and then unlocked seemingly.
All I said was something like “We may want nature to fit into neat boxes but often vegetables are sweet and fruit are savory”. It wasn’t anything less innocuous than the title so I still don’t understand it. Apparently it got removed because I posted some links in the comments to lists of common “fruits” that are actually vegetables and vice versa. If that’s spam then I think they have a very low tolerance for content. I thought it added to the question to describe what I meant and provide examples.
Context is key, I’m just curious to gain more info and views. I’m not antisemitic but I saw a trend of people being accused of antisemitism when they disagreed with a Jewish person for something completely unrelated to anything to do with Judaism or even Israel. For the pedophilia one I was arguing with someone why pedophilia was immoral but just needed some back up. I can see why the titles look sus. Anyhow I understand those are controversial topics but I also think they should be allowed and Reddit would probably allow them unlike Lemmy seemingly. And I don’t see why my fruit question was removed.
Need to drop meat & dairy consumption in rich nations if we have any hope of managing climate change while we transition out of fossil fuels, which will take time.
Likes are anonymous on YouTube.
It appears racial anxiety is a well recognised term that pretty much describes the meaning I’m referring to.
Come to think of it, xenophobia doesn’t really work as a fear of other races since that’s associated with hatred as well. Is it like if it’s common to hate something, we just disregard the capability for some people to have a genuine fear of that thing without hatred? Seems almost like black-and-white thinking. Either you’re fully in support of something and not afraid of it, or else if you’re afraid of it you must hate it as well. No middle ground or nuance or understanding of people who have a fear they’re trying to come to terms with without any hatred.
Well, aquaphobia is the fear of water. That’s a good example because another word actually exists to describe people who are afraid of water rather than just disregarding their fear because the word that might be used for it (hydrophobia) already means something else.
It’s more like, if you use the word phobia for hatred in this case, that’s fine, but then what is the word for having a genuine fear? What are those people called, who don’t hate homosexuality, only fear it? They certainly exist and I feel like it should be a recognised thing rather than them having to either be called a term that doesn’t apply to them in how it’s used or have their phobia completely unacknowledged.
Who said fears need to be rational? I think people can be afraid/terrified of anything. Anatidaephobia (the fear of being watched by a duck or goose), for example.
I couldn’t find any record of this, could you possibly provide some reference?
Happens on lemmy world too.