I think the issue was banning for giving votes you didnāt agree with, not with sending the DMs. Iāve sent DMs instead of doing admin actions before, just to open a dialogue, or to give people a chance to push back or explain before I take some kind of action, and that part seems fine. I canāt even really articulate why it was that this rubbed people so badly the wrong way, but I think sending the DMs and getting in an extended back and forth did somehow make it worse. Definitely doubling down and banning people (and also DMing them) because their reaction and vote on it wasnāt the ācorrectā and permitted one according to you made it worse.
People can vote. People can react. Setting yourself up as this lord and arbiter of whatās right and wrong is always going to make a backlash. If it was me, I would have made a public reply instead of a DM so that other people can weigh in, I would have framed it in terms of āwhat I allow hereā and made sure to clarify the rules on the sidebar instead of framing your point of view as the one thatās objectively the right one (which youāre still doing here, when you describe calling someone ābroā as ātoxicā instead of saying that you personally think itās rude and donāt allow it). And then if they still donāt agree, youāre still within your rights to just say yes okay fine but thatās the rules, sorry, and ban them (and then move on yes).
I still think you would have gotten backlash, but framing it in that way would have at least shown you have some awareness that these categories and judgements are just your categories and judgements, and regardless of what the Lemmy softwareās mod controls have led you to believe, other people are allowed to have their own that are different from yours. If youād done that I donāt think it would have really developed to anything, there might have been one YPTB post about it at worst and then people would have shrugged and moved on with their day.
Iāll say this again: the DM wasnāt about a single vote. It was about endorsing toxic behaviour.
Now, about this word ābro.ā On the surface, it comes across as casual, even friendly. But in practice, ābroā tends to be shorthand for a culture that excuses arrogance, entitlement, and pack mentality under the banner of camaraderie.
A ābroā is the person who laughs at cruelty because itās entertaining. The one who treats someone elseās discomfort as sport. The one who believes inside jokes and mockery outweigh basic respect. That isnāt just harmless slangāitās a posture that normalizes being inconsiderate.
So when people lean on the word ābro,ā theyāre not just using a throwaway expression. Theyāre reinforcing a culture built on lowest-common-denominator bonding, where aggression is rewarded, harm is brushed off, and civility is treated like weakness. Thatās not a culture I want to foster in spaces Iām responsible for.
Now, you may disagree, and thatās fair. But this is my interpretation. And when everyone doubled down on ābroāāusing it in the exact way I find problematicāit only confirmed for me that they were subscribing to bro culture. I donāt do bro, bruh, brah, or dudebro for good reason.
What struck me is that nobody asked why. They just assumed it was a quirk. But to me, itās not a quirkāitās a principle. Maybe these are simply my categories and judgements, but I believe the world genuinely needs fewer bros. Fewer Andrew Tates. Fewer Donald Trumps.
Yes, this is one of my lines in the sand. And the fact that so many people on Lemmy seem comfortable embracing ābroā as an identityāthat, to me, is a real problem.
Sure. Thatās all your opinion. And the rest of Lemmy is letting you know how they plan to react, when instead of trying to convince them of that while respecting their ability to make up their own mind at the end of the day, you ban them for expressing even a hint of any other viewpoint, and insist that theyāre being bad.
I donāt even think your viewpoint is crazy or wrong or anything, but bouncing on mod controls and insisting to people implicitly that theyāre being ātoxicā if they think anything different even if they literally didnāt mean anything wrong or offensive, and thereās a 0% chance that their viewpoint has any validity and 100% that yours is the objectively right viewpoint, isnāt going to make progress on turning people around to it.
This is a super weird take. Lemmy is full of diverse communities and instances. Our instance, for example, has a really high percentage of users with ADHD, ASD and other neurodivergences. We also have a ton of LGBTQI+ folks. So all Iām saying is donāt be too quick to paint Lemmy users with a broad brush.
If Lemmy and bro culture are synonymous, then Lemmy has to be fixed.
Lemmy isnāt about creating a monoculture with a fixed set of values. Itās about having diverse communities and instances with their own sets of values and rules. Thatās the beauty of Lemmy and the fediverse. Demanding that we adopt and police some universal āpolitenessā code across every instance that prohibits the use of the word ābroā simply because thatās what you want is really quite a bizarre notion. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how Lemmy and the fediverse operates. So no, it doesnāt need to be fixed. It is working as intended. Diversity is a big strength of the fediverse. We actively donāt want such things in place, because thatās what happened at places like Reddit, owned by big corpos who suddenly decided they wanted everything advertiser friendly for their IPO.
If you want to be lord and master of your own corner of the internet, nobody is stopping you. But cāmonā¦ all this judgmental language against whole communities of people simply because some folks dared to disagree with your opinion on this topic? It seems like the only thing you have done in this post is make yourself seem even more unreasonable about the topic. None of your responses show a trace of self-reflection, or acceptance of the different perspectives that were shared with you, which is kinda disappointing. If you adopt the position that you are always right and everyone who criticizes you is wrong, then what does that make you? You should do some self crit.
Lemmy is full of diverse communities and instancesā¦ so donāt paint with a broad brush.
I never said Lemmy lacked diversity. I explicitly wrote that not all of Lemmy is bro culture. My point was about specific servers that embrace that culture. Those are the ones I will de-federate from. Thatās not a broad brushāitās a filter.
Demanding that we adopt and police some universal āpolitenessā codeā¦ is a bizarre notion.
I didnāt demand anything universal. Thatās a strawman. Iām not lobbying for every instance to adopt my preferences. I said my server will have standards, and I will apply them consistently. Thatās the very opposite of imposing uniformityāitās me choosing how I run my space.
It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how Lemmy and the fediverse operates.
On the contrary, it shows I understand it perfectly. Federation is built on choice. The right to set boundaries for my serverāincluding who I federate withāis not a misunderstanding, itās the entire point of federation.
So no, it doesnāt need to be fixed. It is working as intended.
You misread my statement. I didnāt say Lemmy needs fixing outright. I said: if Lemmy and bro culture are synonymous, then Lemmy has to be fixed. Thatās a conditional. It only applies in the hypothetical scenario where bro culture is inseparable from Lemmy.
We actively donāt want such things in place, because thatās what happened at Redditā¦
Again, this ignores what I wrote. Iām not calling for top-down enforcement or advertiser-friendly sanitization. Iām calling for exercising my own discretion on my own server. Thatās literally the opposite of Redditās centralized approach.
If you want to be lord and master of your own corner of the internet, nobody is stopping you.ā
Exactly. Thatās what I said I would do. Iām glad you recognize that, but your comment tries to paint that decision as unreasonable when itās actually how the Fediverse is designed to function.
All this judgmental language against whole communitiesā¦
Thatās projection. I didnāt condemn all communities, just those that embrace a style I donāt want to interact with. Thereās nothing ājudgmentalā about drawing lines for the environment Iām responsible for maintaining. Every server admin does this, even if they call it by softer names.
Youāve made yourself seem unreasonableā¦ no trace of self-reflection.
Thatās an unfair characterization. Self-reflection is exactly why I framed my statement with an if. I left room for nuance, acknowledged diversity, and clarified my standards. You ignored those elements and replaced them with a caricature.
If you adopt the position that you are always rightā¦ you should do some self-crit.
Nobody said Iām always right. What I said is: these are my standards, and I will enforce them on my server. Thatās not about being universally āright.ā Itās about being consistent with the principles I believe in. If thatās not to your taste, the beauty of federation is that you donāt have to engage with me at all.
Nobody said Iām always right. What I said is: these are my standards, and I will enforce them on my server. Thatās not about being universally āright.ā Itās about being consistent with the principles I believe in.
While at the same time passing judgment and adopting a disdainful tone towards [those who] disagreed with your opinion. That is the most objectionable part.
For example, in regard to people who (perfectly reasonably) responded negatively towards your private messages, you said:
Where I misjudged thingsāand I see this clearly nowāwas in thinking that private messages would actually reduce conflict. They donāt. If someone shows signs of being toxic, or openly supports toxic behaviour, itās best to take them at their word. A conversation in that situation wonāt lead anywhere productive.
And the only reason you had for calling those users ātoxicā is because they showed some sign of disagreement with your previously unpublished and unknown policy? They are not the toxic ones in this scenario.
A ābroā is the person who laughs at cruelty because itās entertaining. [ā¦]
I mean really? Talk about hyperbole. Any one of us could easily come up with 10 negative and 10 positive connotations for the word ābroā, or āsisā or basically anything else. All you seem to be doing is mis-characterising the use of a commonplace word as problematic based on nothing but your own imaginings, and then using that mis-characterisation to vilify users you disagree with on the topic.
If thatās not to your taste, the beauty of federation is that you donāt have to engage with me at all.
As an anarchist, rigid hierarchies and those who create them arenāt to my taste.
While at the same time passing judgment and adopting a disdainful tone towards disagreed with your opinion. That is the most objectionable part.
Pointing out where I draw boundaries isnāt disdaināitās clarity. Iāve said repeatedly that not all of Lemmy is bro culture. What I wonāt do is pretend that dismissive behaviour (ācool story broā) is just harmless slang. Thatās not disdain, thatās naming behaviour for what it is.
And the only reason you had for calling those users ātoxicā is because they showed some sign of disagreement with your previously unpublished and unknown policy?ā*
Thatās not accurate. I didnāt call people toxic simply for disagreeing. I said if someone shows signs of being toxic or openly supports toxic behaviour, I take them at their word. Thatās different from disagreement. Youāre collapsing behaviour and disagreement into the same thing, and theyāre not.
A ābroā is the person who laughs at cruelty because itās entertainingā¦ I mean really? Talk about hyperbole. Any one of us could easily come up with 10 negative and 10 positive connotations for the word ābro.ā
This isnāt hyperbole. āBroā is rarely neutral in practice. It has consistent cultural functions:
Fake familiarity (ācool story broā from strangers isnāt friendship).
Diminishment and mockery (it often carries sarcasm).
Gender exclusion (assumes a male default in-group).
Gender assumption (applies a label regardless of identity).
Thatās not me inventing baggage out of thin airāitās how the word is used in real contexts.
All you seem to be doing is mis-characterising the use of a commonplace word as problematic based on nothing but your own imaginings, and then using that mis-characterisation to vilify users you disagree with on the topic.
No. Iām not vilifying people for disagreement. Iām drawing a line against behaviours and tones that diminish others. Thatās the job of an admin: curating the space theyāre responsible for. The word ābroā as commonly used isnāt just āa commonplace word.ā Itās a cultural signal that often carries exclusion, mockery, or fake intimacy. Thatās why Iām flagging it.
As an anarchist, rigid hierarchies and those who create them arenāt to my taste.
But you are an admin of lemmy.dbzer0.com. Thatās a hierarchical role. You set the rules. You decide federation. You sit at the top of the decision-making structure. Thereās nothing inherently wrong with thatāevery admin does it. But it undercuts the idea that Iām somehow authoritarian for being upfront about doing the same thing. Running a server is hierarchy. The difference is whether you acknowledge it or pretend it doesnāt exist.
But you are an admin of lemmy.dbzer0.com. Thatās a hierarchical role. You set the rules. You decide federation. You sit at the top of the decision-making structure. Thereās nothing inherently wrong with thatāevery admin does it. But it undercuts the idea that Iām somehow authoritarian for being upfront about doing the same thing. Running a server is hierarchy. The difference is whether you acknowledge it or pretend it doesnāt exist.
Our users can vote admins and mods out if they want to. They also vote on any rule changes. Thatās how a community should function. Thatās how we do checks and balances to prevent abuse of admin powers, such as enforcing my personal opinions on all our users. Iād last about 1 day if I started doing that. So no, it undercuts nothing, and now you are just trying to score pointless debating points so Iāll leave it at that.
I mean definitely get mine first if this glass palace stuff is what yours is all about, this seems to be a hill you want to die on. Problem is it also seems to have been both painstakingly built and maintained by yourself and no one else.
Its getting weird dude, let it go (and yes dude is gender neutral)
You donāt like āBro-cultureā. Thatās a description of a specific sort of gross social movement. You are extending that dislike to a ubiquitous word that only has that connotation when used as a descriptor of āBro-culture-Brosā.
The word itself and itās common usage have nothing to do with that, itās one of the most commonly used, informal, globally-colloquial expressions in our current era.
Itās like getting mad at the word right cause itās part of right-wing, and people use it all the time to indicate direction which is causing a rise of global fascism. Itās not just silly, itās a common reason for you to have an argument with a person.
Itās not an opinion, itās a little loaded argument gun you always have cocked, itās really silly and obvious you just like to argue and this is a pit trap full of sharpened spikes. Grow up.
Thatās just one reason. Another reason I donāt like ābroā is because itās often used as a diminisher. Chill out, bro. Donāt take it so seriously, bro. Itās shorthand for brushing someone off, trivializing their feelings, or cutting them down while pretending itās casual. That dynamic doesnāt build respectāit erodes it.
Also, ābroā creates a sense of fake familiarity. It gets used to imply closeness that isnāt there, as if a single word can override the need for trust or mutual understanding. That kind of assumed intimacy often feels presumptive and even manipulative, especially in spaces where people donāt know each other well.
So basically thereās three solid reasons to not allow bro-talk.
Thereās one reason to use the word ābroā, which I find perfectly acceptable: if someone is a literal sibling. Otherwise, you donāt need it. It shouldnāt be in your vocabulary.
Be that as it may, you may disagree. In which case thereās several Lemmy servers in which itās perfectly allowableābut not mine.
EDIT: And while weāre at it, thereās two more reasons to avoid bro-talk:
Even if meant positively, itās exclusionary
Assumes gender, magnifying the risk of misgendering
Iām not stepping in your stupid, childish, argument trap, you are doing this because you like typing all these words. Again grow the hell up and maybe give your wrist a break.
I empathize and agree with a lot of your points. I see where your coming from. I do find a lot of ābroā talk to come across really cringe.
However, I think you are making an error by banning people for it. If ultimately youāre goal is to build communities and have interesting conversations, then banning people for what is socially widely accepted removes the ability to build connections and learn from others from a wide swath of people. You are essentially quarantining yourself and closing yourself off from others by drawing very innocuous lines in the sand. Youāre limiting your community to only people that are okay with incredibly controlled language and incredibly controlled communities. This diminishes your ability to learn from others, have interesting conversations, and be challenged by new information. A lot of people that might otherwise want to make a connection with you, will find such a strict line so ridiculous they will discount everything else you say because they find you to be so unreasonable.
Also, not everyone uses bro as a deminisher or even gendered, many people do see themselves as being siblings to everyone, all humans are family and saying ābroā is a way of reminding others that we are all connected. You are ultimately harming yourself more than anyone else.
![[Update] AtomicPoet has deleted the piefed.social communities where he was the sole moderator ([email protected] being the exception). Content is still available, details in the linked post](https://lazysoci.al/pictrs/image/cb7c5a29-e297-41a8-bde5-698ba205c3fd.png){kind=link}
I think the issue was banning for giving votes you didnāt agree with, not with sending the DMs. Iāve sent DMs instead of doing admin actions before, just to open a dialogue, or to give people a chance to push back or explain before I take some kind of action, and that part seems fine. I canāt even really articulate why it was that this rubbed people so badly the wrong way, but I think sending the DMs and getting in an extended back and forth did somehow make it worse. Definitely doubling down and banning people (and also DMing them) because their reaction and vote on it wasnāt the ācorrectā and permitted one according to you made it worse.
People can vote. People can react. Setting yourself up as this lord and arbiter of whatās right and wrong is always going to make a backlash. If it was me, I would have made a public reply instead of a DM so that other people can weigh in, I would have framed it in terms of āwhat I allow hereā and made sure to clarify the rules on the sidebar instead of framing your point of view as the one thatās objectively the right one (which youāre still doing here, when you describe calling someone ābroā as ātoxicā instead of saying that you personally think itās rude and donāt allow it). And then if they still donāt agree, youāre still within your rights to just say yes okay fine but thatās the rules, sorry, and ban them (and then move on yes).
I still think you would have gotten backlash, but framing it in that way would have at least shown you have some awareness that these categories and judgements are just your categories and judgements, and regardless of what the Lemmy softwareās mod controls have led you to believe, other people are allowed to have their own that are different from yours. If youād done that I donāt think it would have really developed to anything, there might have been one YPTB post about it at worst and then people would have shrugged and moved on with their day.
Iāll say this again: the DM wasnāt about a single vote. It was about endorsing toxic behaviour.
Now, about this word ābro.ā On the surface, it comes across as casual, even friendly. But in practice, ābroā tends to be shorthand for a culture that excuses arrogance, entitlement, and pack mentality under the banner of camaraderie.
A ābroā is the person who laughs at cruelty because itās entertaining. The one who treats someone elseās discomfort as sport. The one who believes inside jokes and mockery outweigh basic respect. That isnāt just harmless slangāitās a posture that normalizes being inconsiderate.
So when people lean on the word ābro,ā theyāre not just using a throwaway expression. Theyāre reinforcing a culture built on lowest-common-denominator bonding, where aggression is rewarded, harm is brushed off, and civility is treated like weakness. Thatās not a culture I want to foster in spaces Iām responsible for.
Now, you may disagree, and thatās fair. But this is my interpretation. And when everyone doubled down on ābroāāusing it in the exact way I find problematicāit only confirmed for me that they were subscribing to bro culture. I donāt do bro, bruh, brah, or dudebro for good reason.
What struck me is that nobody asked why. They just assumed it was a quirk. But to me, itās not a quirkāitās a principle. Maybe these are simply my categories and judgements, but I believe the world genuinely needs fewer bros. Fewer Andrew Tates. Fewer Donald Trumps.
Yes, this is one of my lines in the sand. And the fact that so many people on Lemmy seem comfortable embracing ābroā as an identityāthat, to me, is a real problem.
Sure. Thatās all your opinion. And the rest of Lemmy is letting you know how they plan to react, when instead of trying to convince them of that while respecting their ability to make up their own mind at the end of the day, you ban them for expressing even a hint of any other viewpoint, and insist that theyāre being bad.
I donāt even think your viewpoint is crazy or wrong or anything, but bouncing on mod controls and insisting to people implicitly that theyāre being ātoxicā if they think anything different even if they literally didnāt mean anything wrong or offensive, and thereās a 0% chance that their viewpoint has any validity and 100% that yours is the objectively right viewpoint, isnāt going to make progress on turning people around to it.
Good luck with your instance I guess.
If Lemmy and bro culture are synonymous, then Lemmy has to be fixed.
If Lemmy will not fix its bro culture, then I will defederate Lemmy.
I believe not all of Lemmy is bro culture. But for those servers that are fine with bro culture, I will de-federate them.
This is a super weird take. Lemmy is full of diverse communities and instances. Our instance, for example, has a really high percentage of users with ADHD, ASD and other neurodivergences. We also have a ton of LGBTQI+ folks. So all Iām saying is donāt be too quick to paint Lemmy users with a broad brush.
Lemmy isnāt about creating a monoculture with a fixed set of values. Itās about having diverse communities and instances with their own sets of values and rules. Thatās the beauty of Lemmy and the fediverse. Demanding that we adopt and police some universal āpolitenessā code across every instance that prohibits the use of the word ābroā simply because thatās what you want is really quite a bizarre notion. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how Lemmy and the fediverse operates. So no, it doesnāt need to be fixed. It is working as intended. Diversity is a big strength of the fediverse. We actively donāt want such things in place, because thatās what happened at places like Reddit, owned by big corpos who suddenly decided they wanted everything advertiser friendly for their IPO.
If you want to be lord and master of your own corner of the internet, nobody is stopping you. But cāmonā¦ all this judgmental language against whole communities of people simply because some folks dared to disagree with your opinion on this topic? It seems like the only thing you have done in this post is make yourself seem even more unreasonable about the topic. None of your responses show a trace of self-reflection, or acceptance of the different perspectives that were shared with you, which is kinda disappointing. If you adopt the position that you are always right and everyone who criticizes you is wrong, then what does that make you? You should do some self crit.
I never said Lemmy lacked diversity. I explicitly wrote that not all of Lemmy is bro culture. My point was about specific servers that embrace that culture. Those are the ones I will de-federate from. Thatās not a broad brushāitās a filter.
I didnāt demand anything universal. Thatās a strawman. Iām not lobbying for every instance to adopt my preferences. I said my server will have standards, and I will apply them consistently. Thatās the very opposite of imposing uniformityāitās me choosing how I run my space.
On the contrary, it shows I understand it perfectly. Federation is built on choice. The right to set boundaries for my serverāincluding who I federate withāis not a misunderstanding, itās the entire point of federation.
You misread my statement. I didnāt say Lemmy needs fixing outright. I said: if Lemmy and bro culture are synonymous, then Lemmy has to be fixed. Thatās a conditional. It only applies in the hypothetical scenario where bro culture is inseparable from Lemmy.
Again, this ignores what I wrote. Iām not calling for top-down enforcement or advertiser-friendly sanitization. Iām calling for exercising my own discretion on my own server. Thatās literally the opposite of Redditās centralized approach.
Exactly. Thatās what I said I would do. Iām glad you recognize that, but your comment tries to paint that decision as unreasonable when itās actually how the Fediverse is designed to function.
Thatās projection. I didnāt condemn all communities, just those that embrace a style I donāt want to interact with. Thereās nothing ājudgmentalā about drawing lines for the environment Iām responsible for maintaining. Every server admin does this, even if they call it by softer names.
Thatās an unfair characterization. Self-reflection is exactly why I framed my statement with an if. I left room for nuance, acknowledged diversity, and clarified my standards. You ignored those elements and replaced them with a caricature.
Nobody said Iām always right. What I said is: these are my standards, and I will enforce them on my server. Thatās not about being universally āright.ā Itās about being consistent with the principles I believe in. If thatās not to your taste, the beauty of federation is that you donāt have to engage with me at all.
While at the same time passing judgment and adopting a disdainful tone towards [those who] disagreed with your opinion. That is the most objectionable part.
For example, in regard to people who (perfectly reasonably) responded negatively towards your private messages, you said:
And the only reason you had for calling those users ātoxicā is because they showed some sign of disagreement with your previously unpublished and unknown policy? They are not the toxic ones in this scenario.
I mean really? Talk about hyperbole. Any one of us could easily come up with 10 negative and 10 positive connotations for the word ābroā, or āsisā or basically anything else. All you seem to be doing is mis-characterising the use of a commonplace word as problematic based on nothing but your own imaginings, and then using that mis-characterisation to vilify users you disagree with on the topic.
As an anarchist, rigid hierarchies and those who create them arenāt to my taste.
Pointing out where I draw boundaries isnāt disdaināitās clarity. Iāve said repeatedly that not all of Lemmy is bro culture. What I wonāt do is pretend that dismissive behaviour (ācool story broā) is just harmless slang. Thatās not disdain, thatās naming behaviour for what it is.
Thatās not accurate. I didnāt call people toxic simply for disagreeing. I said if someone shows signs of being toxic or openly supports toxic behaviour, I take them at their word. Thatās different from disagreement. Youāre collapsing behaviour and disagreement into the same thing, and theyāre not.
This isnāt hyperbole. āBroā is rarely neutral in practice. It has consistent cultural functions:
Thatās not me inventing baggage out of thin airāitās how the word is used in real contexts.
No. Iām not vilifying people for disagreement. Iām drawing a line against behaviours and tones that diminish others. Thatās the job of an admin: curating the space theyāre responsible for. The word ābroā as commonly used isnāt just āa commonplace word.ā Itās a cultural signal that often carries exclusion, mockery, or fake intimacy. Thatās why Iām flagging it.
But you are an admin of lemmy.dbzer0.com. Thatās a hierarchical role. You set the rules. You decide federation. You sit at the top of the decision-making structure. Thereās nothing inherently wrong with thatāevery admin does it. But it undercuts the idea that Iām somehow authoritarian for being upfront about doing the same thing. Running a server is hierarchy. The difference is whether you acknowledge it or pretend it doesnāt exist.
Our users can vote admins and mods out if they want to. They also vote on any rule changes. Thatās how a community should function. Thatās how we do checks and balances to prevent abuse of admin powers, such as enforcing my personal opinions on all our users. Iād last about 1 day if I started doing that. So no, it undercuts nothing, and now you are just trying to score pointless debating points so Iāll leave it at that.
Cool story bro
I mean definitely get mine first if this glass palace stuff is what yours is all about, this seems to be a hill you want to die on. Problem is it also seems to have been both painstakingly built and maintained by yourself and no one else.
Its getting weird dude, let it go (and yes dude is gender neutral)
You donāt like āBro-cultureā. Thatās a description of a specific sort of gross social movement. You are extending that dislike to a ubiquitous word that only has that connotation when used as a descriptor of āBro-culture-Brosā.
The word itself and itās common usage have nothing to do with that, itās one of the most commonly used, informal, globally-colloquial expressions in our current era.
Itās like getting mad at the word right cause itās part of right-wing, and people use it all the time to indicate direction which is causing a rise of global fascism. Itās not just silly, itās a common reason for you to have an argument with a person.
Itās not an opinion, itās a little loaded argument gun you always have cocked, itās really silly and obvious you just like to argue and this is a pit trap full of sharpened spikes. Grow up.
Thatās just one reason. Another reason I donāt like ābroā is because itās often used as a diminisher. Chill out, bro. Donāt take it so seriously, bro. Itās shorthand for brushing someone off, trivializing their feelings, or cutting them down while pretending itās casual. That dynamic doesnāt build respectāit erodes it.
Also, ābroā creates a sense of fake familiarity. It gets used to imply closeness that isnāt there, as if a single word can override the need for trust or mutual understanding. That kind of assumed intimacy often feels presumptive and even manipulative, especially in spaces where people donāt know each other well.
So basically thereās three solid reasons to not allow bro-talk.
Thereās one reason to use the word ābroā, which I find perfectly acceptable: if someone is a literal sibling. Otherwise, you donāt need it. It shouldnāt be in your vocabulary.
Be that as it may, you may disagree. In which case thereās several Lemmy servers in which itās perfectly allowableābut not mine.
EDIT: And while weāre at it, thereās two more reasons to avoid bro-talk:
Iām not stepping in your stupid, childish, argument trap, you are doing this because you like typing all these words. Again grow the hell up and maybe give your wrist a break.
I empathize and agree with a lot of your points. I see where your coming from. I do find a lot of ābroā talk to come across really cringe.
However, I think you are making an error by banning people for it. If ultimately youāre goal is to build communities and have interesting conversations, then banning people for what is socially widely accepted removes the ability to build connections and learn from others from a wide swath of people. You are essentially quarantining yourself and closing yourself off from others by drawing very innocuous lines in the sand. Youāre limiting your community to only people that are okay with incredibly controlled language and incredibly controlled communities. This diminishes your ability to learn from others, have interesting conversations, and be challenged by new information. A lot of people that might otherwise want to make a connection with you, will find such a strict line so ridiculous they will discount everything else you say because they find you to be so unreasonable.
Also, not everyone uses bro as a deminisher or even gendered, many people do see themselves as being siblings to everyone, all humans are family and saying ābroā is a way of reminding others that we are all connected. You are ultimately harming yourself more than anyone else.
And youāve fallen in the pit