politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Basic humanity? Graham lacked it, doesn't mean we should.
So if we celebrated hitler's death we lack humanity? People should be free to celebrate a death if they feel to. Forcing your idea of a moral code over people is not nice. We are not talking about celebrating violence, a crime or wishing for somebody's death.
People should be free to express their feelings if they don't hurt anyone, without having to fear the morality police. The point of modorators should be to create a welcoming and safe space, not to impose your morality on others.
Doesn't matter if you think it's "nice" or not. It's a rule for this community.
Yes, and you could have answered "thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons", instead you basically tell me "Doesn't matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed". I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself.
I don't make the rules here, but I do enforce them.
Right, "you were just doing your job" ...
Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them.
Is it a bannable offense or not?
At the time I shut down last night, I didn't see anything bannable. Going through comments now, but doing my replies first. 😉
Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You're a moderator right? Doesn't that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them?
The original creator of Politics created the rules and invited me, and others to help moderate the rules they created.
"nanana boo boo"
You should answer the question posed though…
Disingenuous questions don't get answers. Ask a question in good faith and I'll answer it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
No, no, you don’t get it. It’s not about being nice, it’s about telegraphing what a good, nonthreatening supplicant you are
I already said he was an asshole and cited the reason, that's not supplication.
You don't have to celebrate death to prove you aren't a supplicant. 😉
You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason.
Reason enough for people with basic human empathy.
I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over
those policies killed people
not just made miserable
fucking killed
but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead?
Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies.
I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies.
It might help you understand WHY you're getting ratioed if you understand this:
Lindsay Graham was basically a serial killer who used votes rather than knives.
Imagine a serial killer murdered someone you love. Wouldn't you cheer when you find out he's died? Wouldn't you be happy he is dead and no longer able to harm others the way he harmed your loved one?
That's how we feel about Graham dying. That's what we're celebrating. Graham is the serial killer who murdered our mama, and we're happy to see him die.
Jesus fucking Christ. We’re really doing this high road virtue signaling bullshit here, too? Cool. Continue being part of the problem, I guess.
If you don't like it, make your own community. It's a stated rule here.
Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter.
Nope, no rule against it so long as you continue being civil about it. Shading over into personal attacks would break rule 3.
Some communities have a rule against meta commentary, which this would fall under, but we don't have that rule here.
Which is weird because !world@lemmy.world DOES have that rule and both were set up by the same person. (Rule #6 in World)
Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions.
I'm working on it. It was clean when I shut down for the night last night, checking the comments now, but I have to get through a buttload of replies first. 😉
Ahhhh, the "when they go low, we go high" approach.
Gee whizz, that approach has really been working out so far, hasn't it...
i mean i go everywhere high. it's worked pretty well for me.
Obviously it needs to go higher so that the fall is harder
Not positive that you should be enforcing your own personal ethics onto other people. Free speech should be a thing. If a person did bad things and people are glad that he is no longer in a position to do bad things, that is a celebration in itself. Trying to enforce opinions like this is self-congratulatory in that you consider your opinion is superior and worthy of judicial enforcement.
Note that I haven't in the slightest commented on the man himself, yet still run the risk of banning. It all depends upon the moderator. This happens on Reddit all the time and that's the problem with this kind of moderation. It has a chilling effect. Give a censor a job and they tend to censor.
Freedom of speech is what the government controls. You have no freedom of speech within a private entity like social media.
The TOS sets the overall rules, each community further defines them.
The Lemmy instances which are "do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" get de-federated pretty damn quickly due to the raw sewage they pump out.
Would you celebrate the death of Hitler?
About eighty years too late, but at the time I feel like I would've.
JL has previously said that Black Lives Matter was a bad thing and has removed psots critical of Israel. So that answers your question.
That is a ratio.
Maybe the rules should be put to a vote by the community?
The community doesn't set the rules, that way lies madness.
Ok agreed. No surprise night raping or murdering people in colonial genocide projects that Graham Cracker. I hope we'll all live to celebrate that fucker dying some day too.
Now on the celebrations.
No. This high road bullshit is why we are in the hole we’re in now. You want to play the game, you need to understand the rules. And you naive to think anything else.
I won’t condone murder, but this fucker deserves his abrupt death and the vitriol that follows. We will always be at the mercy of those fucks because of people like you and it’s time you understand.
I'd like to advocate for a reexamination of that rule.