Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
view the rest of the comments
We all know it's the vegan community. I got banned for simply voting on comments.
Now they're also spamming posts to fill up everyone's feeds.
Same here lmfao, the utter sensitivity.
Edit: Also, it's mostly that one power-mod spamming vitriolic posts. I just blocked them and my feed is a lot nicer. Dude's checking the database and just banning everyone who downvotes him.
Is that something regular moderators can do...?
Not that I particularly care, but I moderate three communities on here and none of the tools available to me show who downvoted what. Exposing that type of info with that type of granularity feels like a bad idea to me; the sort of thing that is just begging to invite some sort of abuse.
Gotcha!
Yep, I mean you can see for yourself, I've never posted anything about veganism nor have I posted on the sub, and I was banned for "anti vegan sentiment" or something, I don't feel like looking back at their rules lol.
Their rules have the word "carnist" in them, so that should show you how seriously to take them.
It's a real word, even if it's a relative neologism, so I'm not sure why you have the scare quotes around it. In fact, the term has been in use for over t20 years, so, IDK man, maybe accept it. Implying that it's not a real word because you don't like it--versus because it's used as a slur to other people--kinda feels like Musk's complaints about cisgender.
Wasn't 'spastic' a mainstream word too, for a hundred years? (Popularity again somehow implies legitimacy here). And I'm sure we can find a number of really objectionable words from the warmer us states that were incredibly popular for decades and are, yet, offensive.
Likewise, we're allowed to dislike words like 'moist' and lazy prefixes like 'cis' while understanding they are still - for the moment - words.
This is a terrible tangent, though, and I'm okay if we stop this worthless digression.
Is spastic no longer an acceptable word? The only context I have for it is involuntary motion, from spasm. (Or the great Skinny Puppy song, Spasmolytic.)
You don't think it's awfully telling that it doesn't make any regular occurrence until that community picks it up?
I think that it's irrelevant to whether or not it's a real word. All words are made-up words. There wasn't any term for cis-gender that had any kind of popularity until about 20 years ago, simply because no one thought of the concept in that way; you were either normal/typical, or you were transsexual (transgender is the preferred term now, since people are also more likely to understand gender in terms of social construction rather than genitals or chromosomes).
Similarly, you can say that carnist is the opposite of vegan; a carnist is someone that is not vegan. A person that is cisgendered is not transgendered. A person that is heterosexual is not homosexual.
Do I find what vegans imply with the term to be insulting? Yes. But that doesn't make it any less real.
It was indeed! The post in question was particularly smarmy and my response was pretty tame in comparison. Why even have a community if you don't want anyone to have a conversation?
Vegans are a relative minority group that a lot of people like to antagonise. That's not to say you were doing that, I haven't looked at what you got banned over. Just that a lot of people do go out of their way to try to annoy vegans, and because there are relatively few vegans those people can quickly drown out any attempt to discuss, like, vegan recipes and such
Honestly most of the posts I see on /c/vegan or /c/veganmemes are just making fun of and antagonizing people who eat meat lmao
Wanna debunk that real quick. I live in Berlin, every major supermarket has a few sections completely dedicated to vegans. And I'm pretty sure they've also become a bit larger in general. Still the minority, but definitely significant by now.
That said, a very small minority is very vocal about it. A lot of people in my circles just live it, and they don't really care to proclaim it, that's the difference. And sure a lot of them want people to eat less meat, but no one is gonna get on your ass about it.
Doesn't really change the jist of what you're saying of course, just wanna make sure we're not dragging the whole movement into it.
Germany has an absolutely huge vegan and vegetarian population compared to other countries though, Berlin even more so. More rural areas of Germany are a very different story, but it’s still way more of the population than in most places.
Take this with a grain of salt, because it’s been more than a decade, but the only restaurant I could visit in the early 2010s in Heidelberg (!) as a vegetarian was an Indian restaurant. I’m in a different college town now and it’s like 20% vegan, but the age demographics are similar to Berlin.
It's tribalism. We're unfortunately all guilty of it in one way or another and it has become more serious with the increase of social media use
I like this explanation in particular: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beyond-school-walls/202304/tribalism-in-the-age-of-social-media
Edit: to add, I am suspecting that I'm still getting brigaded by a group I pissed off last week. It really doesn't bother me if they are doing that, but there are people that take their internet points more serious than I do so there are definitely people in the fediverse that will do that to you
If it helps, votes on here do literally nothing outside of the post they’re in. If there’s a lot on one comment, it gets sorted to the bottom and maybe collapsed, but that’s it. If someone is going around downvoting you, they’re just wasting their own time.
Oh yeah I'm aware. I'm not worried about it. I wouldn't have even figured it out if a couple of people didn't try to taunt me.
That’s… sad.
That explains why I'm banned from there. I saw a post from there pop up on all that I actually agreed with and when I tried to comment I learned I was banned.
I missed this whole thing. I've had them blocked for as long as I can remember.
Could have been lemmy.ml!
Nope.
I have a cousin on FB who's like that, spamming feeds with a lot of stuff promoting a diet that works around her particular allergies and needs and trying to proselytize it to anyone who appears to be listening. The volume was actually really high, and for stuff that isn't family stuff like I usually use that account to just see.
So, blocked. It's like her and a rabid anti-gov/vax/tax nutjob blocked, and I dunno whether that's right.