this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
-44 points (16.7% liked)

politics

19145 readers
2197 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jhymesba@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's just it. Here's the rule you're trying to report him on.

It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

I think that this rule has problems (there ARE paid actors/bots on here and we should be allowed to call them out as such, Mods), but in this case, karobeccary is adhering to the letter of the rule. They're not called you 'boomer faux activist fecal matter masquerading as' anything. They've not even called you an idiot. They've just said that your ideas are poorly considered and don't rise above what they consider facebook mom's group level boomer faux activist fecal matter masquerading as a political position. You're finding offence in that position, but you really don't have room to complain. The opinion is valid. The original article is amplifying Libertarian bullshit that's designed to peel off voters away from mainstream parties towards minor parties who have ZERO chance in hell of being elected but a distinct and very valid chance of ensuring that voters get the major party candidate most opposed to their personal objectives voted in. And while I support that stupid happening to Team Red because that lowers the chance of a fascist dickhead mangling the Oath of Office in 2025 and the chance of the enactment of Project 2025, I don't support pitching that same stupid idea to our side. Obviously, karobeccary thinks the same way and is calling your article out, posting that you're going crazy overboard with it, and shoving it down our throats, despite the downvotes you're getting making it clear we don't want it.

PS: Hiding behind community rules and attacking people that disagree with you isn't a good look.