So we’ve seen the complaints and the reports and boy oh boy are there complaints and reports.

I’ve discussed the account with the other mods and admins multiple times, and while we agree the volume is a lot, it doesn’t point to a botfarm or multiple people using the account.

Obsessive? Absolutely, but not technically rule breaking… Until today.

Today they indescriminately posted the same story three times from three different sources apparently solely to flood the channel showing a decided lack of judgement.

It’s a valid story from a valid source, the original has been kept here:

https://lemmy.world/post/21098916

The others have been removed as duplicates.

I’m also applying a 15 day temp ban on the account.

“15 days? That’s oddly specific! What’s in 15… OH!”

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      14 days ago

      People are commenting about one glaringly obvious troll with a long history of baiting in comments, not calling for widespread bans based on a few posts per user.

      • I appreciate both the lenient approach and the transparency.

        If we wanted an echo chamber, we could have called this /m/VoteBlue or similar and established only pro-Harris posts and comments as a rule.

        I guess, despite the name, it can still become VoteBlue (after all, on a different website world politics used to be discussed on a sub called AnimeT… ) but I think it’s worth asking - if a genuine and civil commenter of a conservative persuasion joined the sub, how willing would we be to actually engage with that person?

        See this example - a liberal who once clerked for a conservative Supreme Court justice (Scalia). https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/02/17/im-a-liberal-lawyer-clerking-for-scalia-taught-me-how-to-think-about-the-law/ (or https://archive.is/KauGu )

        Just because you have vastly different views and many disagreements with someone, doesn’t mean that you can’t engage in good faith with them, or have both sides get something meaningful from the engagement (even if part of the resolution is to continue to agree to disagree on some of the more salient points).

    • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      14 days ago

      This very much appears to be a case where it would be reasonable to break from your default. This is not a typical user doing typical things.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        14 days ago

        Well, yeah, and I did that when I raised the issue with the other mods and admins multiple times. ;)