• poVoqAEnglish
    162·
    12 days ago

    The first two are sweeping generalizations that are like that simply not true and only serve to attack the work of the moderators. If you want to critizise something you need concrete examples.

    The last one… the historical accuracy is debatable, but was it even posted on a thread that discussed pre-ww2 history? Usually such cut&paste comments are made to derail justified complaints regarding ML propaganda about recent events.

    • Blaze@reddthat.comOPEnglish
      106·
      12 days ago

      The first two are sweeping generalizations that are like that simply not true and only serve to attack the work of the moderators. If you want to critizise something you need concrete examples.

      Ironically, the moderators created those examples themselves by removing those comments.

      The last one… the historical accuracy is debatable, but was it even posted on a thread that discussed pre-ww2 history?

      It was not, but as you know, the lemmy.ml moderation discussion always brings up political questions.

      Usually such cut&paste comments are made to derail justified complaints regarding ML propaganda about recent events.

      Indeed. The fact that lemmy.ml bans people about mentioning Tienanmen is still crazy. But that should probably not be a justification for lemmy.world moderators to remove any debatable historical thesis and ban users for that, especially on a community dedicated to the fediverse.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        15·
        12 days ago

        But that should probably not be a justification for lemmy.world moderators to remove any debatable historical thesis and ban users for that, especially on a community dedicated to the fediverse.

        Jesus fucking Christ, the users in question are outright denying massacres, a matter of historical fact not seriously questioned by mainstream academia, performed by a totalitarian state in WW2 on a civilian population, but it’s okay because the totalitarian state isn’t Nazi Germany? It’s just a ‘debatable historical thesis’?

        This is fucked, and it’s extremely strange that you don’t see that.

        • poVoqAEnglish
          71·
          12 days ago

          The debatable part is that the USSR might have considered it a valid tactic to buy time, which is the main thesis of the specific post quoted above. I think it is a postwar rationalisation and Stalin had no qualms about working with Hitler, but that is also debatable.

          What however isn’t debatable is that community moderators can and should remove comments that are only made to derail discussions.

          • Blaze@reddthat.comOPEnglish
            32·
            12 days ago

            The debatable part is that the USSR might have considered it a valid tactic to buy time, which is the main thesis of the specific post quoted above. I think it is a postwar rationalisation and Stalin had no qualms about working with Hitler, but that is also debatable.

            Indeed, thanks for pointing it out.

            What however isn’t debatable is that community moderators can and should remove comments that are only made to derail discussions.

            I read the whole chain of comments, it actually was started by another commenter that mentioned Poland, and then started the whole thing. You can have a look here if you are interested: https://slrpnk.net/post/10244872/9112924