A few days ago, I asked if we could talk about things that happen outside the fediverse. I got a lot of different answers ranging from “yes” to “no” to “it depends”. Hunting someone down somewhere and saying “ah ha I found Zezima on X” isn’t the kind of thing I meant. This is.

That moment when an admin outright makes it absolutely clear if you read the room (those who remember past messages will be able to do that) that they’re going around trying to get back at people and further complicate things for them, the instance in question being in spiteful response to a promotion. The incentive to weigh in is thus pre-existing, plus I am fediversally relevant because I have been accused of being them (not that I’m the only one), so I get the contagion.

It’s a bit much.

        • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeEnglish
          11·
          6 hours ago

          It’s not even true. That’s one of the targeters in question and they repeat that everywhere. Look at their registration date.

          • Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            2·
            5 hours ago

            Registration date doesn’t really matter if that person wasn’t on Lemmy and wanted to comment after seeing this post.

            Anyway, seems like there is a lot of drama spanning across DeviantArt, Reddit, documents on YouTube and Dailymotion videos.

            I don’t know what to do with this. You do a good job modding !casualconversation@lemm.ee , that’s what I’m mostly interested in.

            • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeEnglish
              11·
              5 hours ago

              Thanks. People sadly don’t use critical investigation which would show such documentation as false (or, more accurately, a mix of falsehoods, exaggerations, and issues already long dealt with, with actual faults of mine currently falling under the last one because time passes). Rule enforcers typically know this (with one exception), it’s always onlookers who don’t.

                • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                  1·
                  3 hours ago

                  I have zero opinion on any of this. I just looked at the modlog and wanted to point out that most of the bans are from .ml

                  It’s basically a right of passage to get banned from .ml so I wouldn’t take those as proof of character one way or the other.

                • Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  2·
                  5 hours ago

                  A person on DeviantArt wrote up an extensive run-down of this person if you want to go down a rabbit hole.

                  Definitely a rabbit hole. No time enough for now.

                • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeEnglish
                  13·
                  4 hours ago

                  If you want to know why I locked the discussion you mentioned, read the community rules. You say I falsely paint myself as a victim as if your whole existence here, which is a day old, doesn’t 100% consist of attacks towards me. All the things you claim I am denying guilt of here that actually happened did so years ago, all of which have been compensated for in some way. Had you accused me of some of them at the time, you would have seen me oblige to what you say I haven’t done, but here you all are threateningly following me everywhere trying to hold every single thing I’ve ever said or done against me because of your little grudge, all while making claims that I have been removed from places I haven’t actually been removed from.

    • CraigOhMyEggo@lemmy.mlOP
      12·
      2 days ago

      You wanna say that to the whole community? I’m using it how it was designed to be used, following up on a previous message (and preceding another one) that also used it how it was designed to be used. And these were, in turn, responses to other things where people might say what you just said but haven’t. The way to address an issue is not to leave/relocate like someone who was forcefully evicted.

    • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeEnglish
      2·
      25 days ago

      He’s not kidding when he says the context to understand the whole thing is in what he redirects to.

      For example, the second and third sentence is a direct response to the replies which talk about the conditions for which the actions he is asking about would be considered “good”. Take the top response for example: “I think you might be the drama at that point.”

      In the fifth sentence, he alludes to the understanding that the person who made a “first move” (which would be relevant in the discussions just mentioned) is the individual in question, before citing the first few moments of the context (before continuing to elaborate the first part of the fifth sentence). The “promotion” mentioned is an admin promotion. “The incentive to weigh in is thus pre-existing” refers to this, and then he mentions why it applies to him.

      I have English issues and even I could comprehend all of this.

      • Blaze (he/him)@feddit.orgEnglish
        6·
        25 days ago

        I just watched the Youtube video, I’m even more confused. Is that channel accusing you of being a pedophile? What the heck?

        • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeEnglish
          41·
          25 days ago

          Yes, that’s what going on. I’ve always been someone people are inclined to make into a target.

                • ShiverMeTimbers@lemm.eeEnglish
                  21·
                  2 days ago

                  You saying all that context doesn’t affect their ability to ignite people into a deceptively charged fury? I can imagine this is frustrating. People just amaze me. They say the biggest signal that something is a cult is that the person in charge has so much charisma that they can say anything (and I mean anything, for example someone could claim “I am not crude matter, I am a human-shaped beam of light”) and have people believe them without critical thinking or vetting something for contradictions, like what the leader of the Ant Hill Kids was said to be able to do. And they say the biggest signal that something is a gimmick is that some attribute of something makes people resort to exceptionalism in their critical thinking, as is the case when one person happens upon the best case (though still flawed since it’s not true) someone like you must a pedo based on the flawed evidence, and people who normally have standards for how they treat others forgo those entirely and say it’s fair game to give you literal hell (think of the pretty patties from Spongebob: “but, but they’re colored”… apply that to someone’s life and say “I must keeeel them, they’re colored like a pedo”).

                  Somewhat makes me wonder if it’s accurate to say that, in a world where some people steal trust by exploiting psychology, people not trusting you is actually a sign of your trustworthiness, in the same way as how a billionaire who clearly stole their wealth has a lower worth than someone poor out of their mind. Especially when they’re not just exploiting mental weaknesses but attacking people merely for not immediately agreeing and conflating them with their target. I noticed the whole clique is obsessed with misinformation.

            • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeEnglish
              2·
              25 days ago

              Having seen that kind of thing attempted, there is every sign at this point the people in charge there won’t allow any changes/intervention.