1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
Ignoring the whole.... thing.... is this something kbin has the ability to prevent? Is first-come-first-serve moderation baked into the platform, or do we have a way to democratize/decentralize moderating, recall moderators, etc.
Or do we just have to accept the inevitability of mediocre power mods?
The only way for owner of a magazine to step down, currently, is to elect someone else as co-mod and then leave. Users on any platform could always sub and post to other instances and leave the powermod holding his dick, but this kind of thing may need to be addressed in the future.
Not sure whether voting people in/out of mod powers is the way to go, as it leaves good mods hyper susceptible to takeover brigading. At the very least, some hard limits need to be the norm. Maybe restrict it to 10-12?? No one should need to mod 30 different things on any instance.
@Izzent Ever heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_conservatism ?
Because of all the closeted Republicans. Why do you think they constantly talk about Gay and Transpeople all the time ? Its what they are thinking about 24-7
I'd like to think that it's just an lgbt person who's also conservative (I'm transsexual and on the conservative side myself) but given it's "lgbtq" I kinda have a feeling it's probably a more progressive person who claimed the conservative sub to control it, rather than genuine interest...
I'd like to ask a question in good faith here, if that's alright.
If you are trans, why are you supporting American conservatives that platform policies against your health and existence?
I'm not asking as a 'gotcha,' because that lacks a compassionate curiosity. But I'm puzzled because these stances and identities seem incompatible and I'd like to understand better why, to you, they are.
You're under no obligation to answer, but I'm trying something new and pumping the brakes before I shut down curiosity to make a judgment. Whether you'll afford me that or not, is up to you.
Just curious, why are you assuming they are American?
I am not assuming they're American. I'm assuming they support American Conservative policy in reference to the instance that is primarily about American Conservatism being discussed. Which is how I asked the question.
I haven't the foggiest clue where this person is from or where they currently live.
Well to start, being conservative doesn't mean I necessarily support the american republican party or the various republicans in it. I like some more than others, but I typically don't vote republican.
When it comes to "my health and existence", ironically enough republicans tend to push back against transgender legislation that tramples over transsexual rights and healthcare. See the pushback against the equality act for a good example.
My views on lgbt are kinda complicated, and don't fit neatly within either the democrat or republican party, but they're "conservative" in nature (ie not new, but rather a return to how things were before).
On other issues, I tend to be conservative. For instance I'm pro-life, pro-gun, pro-free speech, etc.
I also consider myself to have far left economic views, akin to stuff like socialist policies (ubi, medicare for all, etc). So in practice I end up feeling more like a far left person with some conservative cultural/social views. There's not really a good label for people in this situation lol. I usually say "far left conservative" but that just confuses people lol.
Thank you for answering.
Why do you believe the Equality Act tramples over transsexual rights and healthcare?
And do you think your conservative values are instrinsic, or a part of your upbringing?
So on the equality act, it's a modification to existing legislation. the existing legislation protects sex-based rights (anti-discrimination), and the unstated assumption is that it includes lgbt. with the equality act it changes the definition of "sex" to refer to the vague pseudoscientific concept of "gender identity" which is predicated on the idea that transsexuals don't exist. The end result of reading the text being that sex isn't protected, and neither is transsexualism, but instead this gender identity concept.
A similar thing results in other laws/legal changes where transsexuals are just erased from the legislation. It's unclear what impacts that will have in the real world, but it's concerning nonetheless. The most recent efforts to change the icd have completely removed transsexualism, and if it's read literally, I'd lose access to healthcare.
As for my conservative views, I do not think they are intrinsic nor a part of my upbringing. I actually grew up with liberal views on social topics and have slowly become more conservative in my adult years. I used to be ambivalent and lean pro-choice on abortion, whereas as an adult I educated myself on the topic and came to the conclusion that pro-life is the proper way to go.
If we're to do a deep dive into psychology and political philosophy, I don't think my underlying values have changed (I still support freedom, life, etc). But rather my views on the best way to approach that have changed.
Cool.
I don't agree in the slightest with anything you said. I didn't ask as a means of debate, however, so I will refrain from any sort of counter-argument.
But I think the last part of what you said elucidates a lot. I think underlining that your values stayed the same, but your interpretations of how to best uphold those values being the part that changed gives some insight into the compatibility of your ethos. That's a very helpful for understanding others.
Thank you for answering truthfully and in good faith.
Interesting point
