this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
138 points (91.6% liked)
Lemmy.world Support
3228 readers
18 users here now
Lemmy.world Support
Welcome to the official Lemmy.world Support community! Post your issues or questions about Lemmy.world here.
This community is for issues related to the Lemmy World instance only. For Lemmy software requests or bug reports, please go to the Lemmy github page.
This community is subject to the rules defined here for lemmy.world.
You can also DM https://lemmy.world/u/lwreport or email report@lemmy.world (PGP Supported) if you need to reach our directly to the admin team.
Follow us for server news 🐘
Outages 🔥
https://status.lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You've jumped to a lot of conclusions here.
You're using a website that's operated by volunteers, that's seen a ton of abuse from spammers and bots, that's run on software that's pre-version-1 and that lacks advanced mod tools, and that likely has an admin team that's using some hacked together third party scripts or tools to try and identify bad actors. It's not only possible, but entirely reasonable, that one of those tools may have falsely identified you as a spam account, and someone either just ran a script that banned a bunch of people, or got into a flow state and just hit the wrong button out of habit.
Pointing fingers and accusing others of bad behaviour out of pure speculation while you're both stomping your feet and having a fit because you feel hurt while simultaneously telling others that the lens they're using is "pure speculation" is... Not productive, to put it mildly.
If you're making your own scripts that can wipe out an entire, legitimate, actively contributing member, you're incompetent and should shut that shit down.
A script should never do that. It should flag them for manual review.
Sorry, but it's 100% on the mod team. Let's switch out power trip for incompetent.
I don't really have issue with a bot rate limiting, or suspending users (provided the false positive rate is low enough), but there does need to be a robust appeal and undo process which is the bit which seems to be lacking here.
That's always the dilemma. The higher the ratio of banning bots, the higher rate of false positives. Do you want more bots with virtually no users being banned or do you want virtually no bots with a lot of legitiment users being unfairly banned?
The answer most sane people take is the former but not everyone shares that opinion.
Using scripts to flag possible bots/spammers is fine. The final decision should be made by a human though. I would volunteer for that.
Sure but you'd need enough volunteers to sort through hundreds or even thousands of flags daily. Not always possible with large userbases but having a 'likely false positive' subset that can be done by manual review would be good.
You shouldn't have lost your contributions and it's made worse by an ineffective restoration feature.
Yes, indeed!
Flag them for manual review... You forgot that the MANUAL reviewers are f*cking volunteers. LW lost already few because of that trauma. And they would rather wipe a user than have a chance on spreading csam.
Don't volunteer if you're just going to complain about it. You sound worse than Reddit mods.
You sound like the unfriendly guy that got banned on r/funny with the reason "unfunny". You are complaining non stop here.
Says the guy who wrote a rant reply to my week old comment. Cope, buddy.
Says the guy who wrote a rant about my rant that you ranted about your issue with the world. Cope not my buddy.
Did you thought about, the possibility, that someone just simply had no time in the past week?
Yes I did, you are right, sorry. I am just angry because I feel that I have been treated in an unfair manner. I edited the part where I jumped to conclusions.
I understand that but that does not justify nonchalantly destroying all my posts and then not contacting me about it even once.
Running a script that automatically deletes posts without human confirmation and without having the ability to bring deleted posts back, in case the script makes a mistake, seems like a questionable and bad practice to me. When they tried to bring the posts back and it turned out that it was not working they should have at least contacted me to communicate what happened.
That person must have really been in the zone then, considering we are talking about 34 posts. Flow state or not, that would be a pretty embarassing fail but still understandable since humans make mistakes - however, not contacting me at all to communicate about what happened is not.
I edited the part where I jumped to conclusions ...
The comment you are referring to is de facto based only on speculation. I also wrote that it might be correct but that I would like to know the official reason instead of guessing around. How is that not productive?