This was in Lemmy world politics.

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well, that’s not ideal. Have they actually taken action on it, though? If it’s just getting heated in an argument, that definitely seems not as bad as handing out bans for misspelling “Palestinian” or talking about jury nullification.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re talking about the exchange featuring your statements “The victim gave consent (as far as a 12-year old can do that of course). She in fact started self-harming because he got convicted and still does not regret or feel bad about the encounter.” and “According to the case notes, the attraction was mutual. He did not have to coerce her, by her own statements. It’s why he wasn’t convicted of grooming. Seriously, do at least a modicum of research.” Right? That’s the only time I see that anyone moderated you. Also, it wasn’t FlyingSquid that gave you that ban. They were just arguing with you, and then I think someone else banned you for your statements.

        Here’s what Wikipedia says about Steven van de Velde:

        He was convicted of child rape in 2016; in 2014, when Van de Velde was 19, he raped a 12-year-old British girl, after contacting her on social media, travelling to Britain to meet her, and giving her alcohol.

        This is, to me, yet another example of FlyingSquid doing absolutely nothing wrong, and then people spreading rumors about how they’re terrible.