MightBe

I want to give my side of the story.

I removed one of person's comment on the political community because it was reported, from what I can recall, it was a very long, borderline QAnon level rant that was antagonizing other users for essentially not buying into their conspiracy theory, which we took very seriously here.

This person was not even banned, and the modlog can confirm that.

I have had literally zero interaction with this person in any form other than this single comment removal. I have never sent this person a single DM or reply, and I think our admins can confirm that.

When I woke up the next morning, I saw 4 already removed reply to my comments from this person, and it appears that this person has already purged their own account.

If you didn't want to engage in more drama, then why did you title this post "new mod drama", instead of just "admin action and mod removal" for YoBuck?

Lund, all my communication to you were in the DMs, please show everyone the messages where I am hostile to you, because I don't remember sending anything of that nature to you, while you are making it sound like I am hurling insults and slurs at you which simply was not true.

For little_cow, I was frustrated with their actions with the MBFC controversy that both you and them were involved in, I was trying to find a way to handle it delicately, but you two seem intent on causing as much drama with that as possible.

Didn't your top mod tell you I was discussing future rule changes with them in the DMs? I told you before that I'm busy with work, talk to me in the DMs, if you want me to get on Discord for important things, schedule a time, I can't spend all day there.

It is really telling to me then that you worked with YoBuckStopsHere for ~6 months, while he said horrid things around our instance as a mod, like "dropping white phosphorus on civilians isn't a war crime", "a girl who is a victim of suicide doesn't deserve sympathy", or when he was banned from startrek.website for being a homophobe and the embarrassing events that followed, and you removed me in 2 weeks for daring to take feedback for improvement, actually enforcing the rules you set up, and not wanting to be a part of the powermod mess that caused this whole thing to begin with.

Let it be known that I personally despise Fox News.

But as a moderator, I don't see why this would be removed just because it came from Fox News, since it is factual info they got from the AP.

I've restored the post, OP, if you are Oak with people in the comments downvoting you for submitting Fox News, that's your own business.

Since we still ask submission title to match that of the article as part of the rule, please update your title.

The headline is a bit misleading, as you can see in the 2nd paragraph of the submission text, it's the current round of assistance that has halted, and they're pushing for Congress to continue their support of Ukraine.

It seems like you assume I know a lot of things I either don’t know or forgot about.

You admit that you have no evidence at all, and you are going around calling people who disagree with you "Russian bots"?

Suspicious voting patterns, repetitive spam messages, all of these would constitute as evidence, and our admins ban these spam bots usually within minutes.

"what is wrong with your brain?” which would not be taken as seriously by anyone I know.

You are going around and calling people stupid," it's just a joke bro" is not going to cut it. Ironic prejudice is still prejudice.

I don't want to argue with you more. Take the next 3 days off, talk about something else, think about how you can contribute positively before you come back.

You do realize I read Lemmy right?

No, they were reported multiple times, and I removed them by hand, no bots were involved.

Like I said in the modlog, if you have actual evidence of botting, let's see it, otherwise, you are intentionally antagonizing people, and I can't let you do that.

That's a reasonable and well thought out answer, I can accept that.

Thank you.

Please update your submission title to reflect a potential change in the article title, as current rule does ask that they match.