There was a post the other day about a "powermod" from reddit who was doing the same thing with lemmy communities - snatching up dozens of names and squatting on them. Folks are rightly asking for restrictions on the number of communities any one person can mod, along with other safeguards to prevent power-tripping.
58The problem was that mod was doing it on lemmy.world, which was the default instance for a lot of users.
It isn't as valuable to do here as someone can create a new sub on a different instance, but it was still annoying.
25Is there any incentive other than showing who's boss on the internet? I struggle to see how the amount of time and energy involved in moderating just one community, let alone multiple ones, are worth it just to get a power high. It seems exhausting.
19It's an influence game like anything else online now that the Internet is commoditized. Corporations and political influence campaigns can and do pay for control of high-traffic accounts and communities to nudge discussions to benefit whatever they're selling.
4
Mods on the Star Trek communities on StarTrek.world will delete (and ban you) for even the slightest negative opinion about the show Star Trek Discovery. Even if you say that you dislike the show, or that you think the writing is sub-par, or anything slightly minor and inoffensive, poof! Your comment is gone, and you’re banned.
It’s not a rule in the sidebar, which is most frustrating, too. All you get is “not constructive”, even though there are plenty of complaints about other things, some pretty abrasive. But one unadoring word about Discovery, and you and your comment vanish without warning.
42It’s because that sub was basically moved from Reddit to the fediverse.
The nice thing about the fediverse is you can start a separate uncensored star trek sub and they can’t do anything about it (unlike how they got alternatives shut down on Reddit).
25Yeah the thing that really pissed me off is how they got r/star_trek shut down. Not only could you not have an honest conversation about something you love on the official sub, when someone makes an alternative for that specific reason they still just can't let people have it. There was a lot of criticism of the r/startrek mods on there for a while, admittedly, but they deserve it. It's pathetic.
It’s because that sub was basically moved from Reddit to the fediverse and resides on the actual Star Trek website. Just proves the rumor that CBS/Paramount has been influencing it all along.
Well shit.
10Check it: !startrek@lemmy.ml
it’s not a new community, but I just joined the mod team and I’ve updated the community guidelines in this Community Update post. It’s more permissive and, I think, much more reasonable and transparent. Coe on over, and help revitalize the community!
Live long and prosper! 🖖
3
That's why I unsubbed from r/startrek on Reddit. I wasn't banned but I've seen many threads deleted that had genuine criticism of Discovery.
I didn't stick around long enough to see if they behaved the same way with Picard, but my guess is yes.
9The stupid thing is that the criticism is entirely valid. The fact that Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks are so good, basically proves that it isn't a problem with new trek, just their stupid "gritty" interpretation of it.
Although in fairness Picard gets better when it just becomes more TNG. But you have this weird slog to get through before you get there, where for some reason Jean-Luc Picard is hanging out in some universe that's got nothing to do with Star Trek and feels like Mass Effect the TV show or something with all its melodrama.
6Check it: !startrek@lemmy.ml
it’s not a new community, but I just joined the mod team and I’ve updated the community guidelines in this Community Update post. It’s more permissive and, I think, much more reasonable and transparent. Coe on over, and help revitalize the community!
Live long and prosper! 🖖
1
Good news!
I’ve just been added t the mod team over at !startrek@lemmy.ml and have posted a Community Update with new community guidelines that outline a more open policy on discussions that includes the ability to express criticism without fear of your comments vanishing or being capriciously banned without warning.
However, there are (as outlined in the post) some guidelines about how those discussions should go. We don’t want unhinged rants about how you hate X that just devolve into toxic threads. If you’re going to be critical, make it constructive criticism that fosters civil discussion, and keep it relevant to the post you’re commenting on. Irrelevant tangents and a lot of toxicity will be curtailed. But, otherwise, we feel it would be disingenuous and dishonest to outright ban all dissenting opinions and the discussion of when Trek sometimes fails to hit its mark.
Rules are in the sidebar, and if you have any questions or comments, you can comment on the Community Update post, reply to this comment, or contact me!
Live long and prosper! 🖖
2
[Removed]
33If that is a Meta commentary, then that is clever.
22
Permanently Deleted
18That is indeed bad for the person :/
Why do they do that? Lability reasons?
6Looks like we need a new community. There are definitely two communities for depression. Try those
2Check it: !startrek@lemmy.ml
it’s not a new community, but I just joined the mod team and I’ve updated the community guidelines in this Community Update post. It’s more permissive and, I think, much more reasonable and transparent. Coe on over, and help revitalize the community!
Live long and prosper! 🖖
1
Good news!
I’ve just been added t the mod team over at !startrek@lemmy.ml and have posted a Community Update with new community guidelines that outline a more open policy on discussions that includes the ability to express criticism without fear of your comments vanishing or being capriciously banned without warning.
However, there are (as outlined in the post) some guidelines about how those discussions should go. We don’t want unhinged rants about how you hate X that just devolve into toxic threads. If you’re going to be critical, make it constructive criticism that fosters civil discussion, and keep it relevant to the post you’re commenting on. Irrelevant tangents and a lot of toxicity will be curtailed. But, otherwise, we feel it would be disingenuous and dishonest to outright ban all dissenting opinions and the discussion of when Trek sometimes fails to hit its mark.
Rules are in the sidebar, and if you have any questions or comments, you can comment on the Community Update post, reply to this comment, or contact me!
Live long and prosper! 🖖
1
The guy who runs my instance is a total fucking clownshow
16How are you liking running your own instance?
10The peace of mind is amazing. It cost me next to nothing with a digital ocean droplet. Highly recommend
5Aren't you listening? He's not liking it! His users are pissed!
4
Why don't you choose another
2My therapist calls that disassociation disorder and wanted to put me on pills to quiet the voices.
Oh you mean another instance.
6
There's barely moderation, much less overreach.
15Some instances censor incoming and outgoing swear words, I was surprised to learn.
13That is absolutely removed.
14Removed that removed.
7
Clbuttic.
5What the f**k?
3
[CENSORED]
13Nonexistent.
10
