I made an admittedly editorialized post, but that is allowed. There is no rule against editorializing titles. The link was to this excellent story by Erin Reed:

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/iowa-dem-josh-turek-releases-anti

The story documents the efforts of Democrat-in-Name-Only Josh Turek to graft Republican anti-trans policies and bigotry into the Democratic party. The (supposed) automoderator flagged the post and removed it for being a “substack post.” However, it was likely a manual removal as I would expect automoderator to work quickly, while this was up for hours.

The rule cited was:

“Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading.”

This article clearly meets this requirement. Erin in the Morning is an entire journalistic operation with multiple employees. I’m sure they’re incorporated in some form. Erin Reed is the most prominent trans rights journalist in the US, probably in the world. She’s nationally famous, has won numerous national journalism awards, and has a Wikipedia page. She frequently appears on national media and speaks at events of all kinds. She is one of the most prominent transgender people in the United States.

But apparently if you’re trans, to c/politics, regardless of what you accomplish, you can never be a real journalist, only a blogger. Real journalism is for cis people only.

  • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
    91·
    2 days ago

    Like, dude, if my goal was just “how do I defend the mod in this situation”, do you really think I’d choose to assume that ridiculous title was a-okay because the OP said so, not even try checking the other rules, and focus solely on the merits of whether they violated Rule 2? No, because I went into this asking “If I were a mod in this community, would I have removed this post for violating Rule 2?” And the two original answers I came up with were basically 1) “Yes” and 2) "Yes, but I could see myself reinstating it if they messaged me and provided evidence that I was wrong about the nature of the source

    This has been the standard MO for world mods whenever Jordan is brought up so yes. The entire point is you’re giving someone who deserves no benefit of the doubt for multiple reasons that benefit and now attacking those people who are tired of their continuous actions like this while also ignoring the context.

    And this is still you blaming the poster for not groveling before Jordan

    Although it still doesn’t seem like you tried to message the mods before this for clarification or to try and appeal, which is the main point – namely that you’re assuming transphobic bad faith without at least trying to talk with them first given your post at best toes the line.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
      37·
      2 days ago

      This has been the standard MO for world mods whenever Jordan is brought up so yes.

      Lmao, like lemmy.world mods are part of some cabal who circle the wagons around one mod.

      I don’t know if it’s possible for you not to project an obsession with this one rando on the backwater of the Internet onto me, but:

      • I went into this post not even knowing who the removing mod is. The post doesn’t say, I didn’t look, and I’m not chronically online enough to have made any assumptions. Your comment, after I’d already read the post and considered my response, was what told me this was Jordan.
      • I barely know who Jordan is. I think I’ve ever interacted with them a few times, and that drama with them a while back (I think it had to do with them power tripping and being a Zionist? I can’t remember) pretty much passed me by from what I can remember. I have no compelling baseline reason to want to defend them for anything they say or do.
      • One thing I do vaguely remember about the drama is Jordan’s power tripping being protected by the LW admins, which is maybe where you’re getting the idea to blame the mods. In reality, a community I moderate and the one I care about the most, !vegan@lemmy.world, was the target of a power-tripping LW admin who was protected by the other admins. I’ve let that be a bygone, but I have no particular allegiance to the admin team, their actions, or who they choose to associate with. I leave them alone, they leave me alone, and that’s been the status quo for I think over a year now.

      TL;DR: I could not have given less of a shit who removed the post. I cared about what the OP wrote in their post, which was “The post was removed claiming a Rule 2 violation. I don’t think it was a Rule 2 violation, and here’s why.”

      • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        81·
        2 days ago

        Lmao, like lemmy.world mods are part of some cabal who circle the wagons around one mod.

        The power mods and admins absolutely do.

        TL;DR: I could not have given less of a shit who removed the post. I cared about what the OP wrote in their post, which was “The post was removed claiming a Rule 2 violation. I don’t think it was a Rule 2 violation, and here’s why.”

        Yet you’re upset with me calling out a ptb. I think you care more than you let on

            • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
              34·
              2 days ago

              and he’s someone who recently was featured on this community.

              I like how you very conspicuously leave out how I was “featured on this community”, because that would make your flimsy character attack completely fall apart.

              Here’s the thread I was “recently featured” in. Sitting at -8 upvotes, and the OP makes a clown out of themselves the entire thread as they get hit with overwhelming “YDI”.

              I think your main problem you have with me is that you’re an anti-vegan, anti-environmentalist, anti-science, bad-faith troll who doesn’t like that I moderate a space for vegans where you’re not allowed to just come in and Gish gallop to try to discredit peer-reviewed environmental science. (Note: I have this thread saved after the last time explicitly because they love to show up and give the same canned disinformation to respond to this particular study, so I keep it now as a canned response.)

                • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  23·
                  2 days ago

                  For as much as you love this uniquely annoying, disruptive pattern of replying to the same comment via multiple comments, it’s funny that one of them wasn’t mentioning the elephant in the room.

                  Namely that the thread you were talking about, deliberately taking completely out of context, and consicuously not linking to is about as clear-cut a “YDI” response as one usually seems to get on YPTB – with the OP spending the entire thread being so insufferable that everyone understands why they deserved it.

                  I’m glad you like me sharing the link, because apparently unlike you, I like sharing links to provide context for what I’m talking about.

                  • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    51·
                    2 days ago

                    your insinuation that I deliberately withheld information is wrong. I just didn’t want to spend any more time on it. you haven’t provided such a link either. are you deliberately misrepresenting the post and hiding the truth??