The users are taking issue with the admins falling for the troll and allowing the troll to make the space hostile. Their engagement is with the admin/mod response, not with the user.
If you genuinely believe dragons are real and they are able to type and have some understanding of the English language, go gather the data, get it peer reviewed and objectively verified, and go collect your Nobel Prize. Otherwise, if you occupy a space in which people must act as if dragons or Santa or Groot are real, that is an improv roleplay in which failure to say “Yes, and” is a bannable offense. Reality persists. Eppur si muove.
fantasy creatures
By using that adjective, you are implying there are creatures which do not exist. You’re defending the admin response by partaking in the same act which got the users banned.
Imagine dragonfucker instead said “I am Jesus Christ reborn, refer to me as the Lord.”. Obvious madness and I doubt any community would respect it. It’s the same fantasy shit just dragons are nominally aligned with furry culture
Why are you hung up on the “dragons aren’t real” thing? That was never a requirement. Some people will argue that being trans isn’t real, being plural isn’t real, being genderfluid isn’t real, being bigender or another gender entirely isn’t real. (Not that you are claiming this.) As such, the admins there simply decided that there won’t be a line drawn. Let people do what they want. Heck, you could consider it “roleplaying” if you’re more comfortable with that, or alternatively, simply don’t engage. It’s disrespectful and not to mention disruptive to make it an issue.
I mean, apparently so, but I was not operating under the assumption that “We don’t believe in gender, this is all roleplay” was the base state of the instance, and many others seem surprised by it too.
What part of the removed comments do you think was considered gatekeeping by the admins, if not the statements that dragons aren’t real?
there won’t be a line drawn
Then any interaction in that superposition of reality and fiction is pointless. Acknowledgment of reality will be arbitrarily censored, such as above. It ceases to be roleplay and becomes a localized Ministry of Truth with the admins kowtowing to the trolls.
Let people do what they want.
People wanted to state the obvious about objective reality. Admin did not let them do that. People wanted to distinguish between reality and fiction. Admin did not let them do that.
By questioning the person’s neopronouns, you’re gatekeeping which identities or pronouns are acceptable. Nobody cares whether dragons are real or not. Many letters of the alphabet mafia have been questioned on whether they are real or not, and even continue to be, so over here, we’re simply not doing that.
As for why you’re being disrespectful: You broke the rules of the space and now you’re making a big stink about it. Considering you’re admitting yourself you think this person is a troll, I think it’s time to admit your loss. You “fell” for them, got “tricked” into breaking a rule, and got banned as a result.
Have y’all never seen assholes abuse the language of sexual preference?
We’ve had to deal with people insisting that fucking kids is their identity. NAMBLA was a whole thing, to the point it became a South Park episode and a running gag on the Daily Show. Over on Tumblr, people tried pushing “minor-attracted person” or MAP as just another humdrum flag under the rainbow. If any forum said ‘you will not question that or imply the slightest disagreement with that,’ would you suddenly respect those people?
Hell, 4chan tried pushing “super straight” to mean, only cis women count. This was a deliberate organized effort (by 4chan standards) to appropriate the shape of queer activism, specifically to shit on trans people. As if calling those bigots, bigots, was the real bigotry.
Some things are not sexual preference. Calling that gatekeeping, instead of just having a definition, is a thought-terminating cliche. Acceptability has nothing to do with it - this thing is not that thing. It’s a category error.
The users are taking issue with the admins falling for the troll and allowing the troll to make the space hostile. Their engagement is with the admin/mod response, not with the user.
If you genuinely believe dragons are real and they are able to type and have some understanding of the English language, go gather the data, get it peer reviewed and objectively verified, and go collect your Nobel Prize. Otherwise, if you occupy a space in which people must act as if dragons or Santa or Groot are real, that is an improv roleplay in which failure to say “Yes, and” is a bannable offense. Reality persists. Eppur si muove.
By using that adjective, you are implying there are creatures which do not exist. You’re defending the admin response by partaking in the same act which got the users banned.
Imagine dragonfucker instead said “I am Jesus Christ reborn, refer to me as the Lord.”. Obvious madness and I doubt any community would respect it. It’s the same fantasy shit just dragons are nominally aligned with furry culture
Why are you hung up on the “dragons aren’t real” thing? That was never a requirement. Some people will argue that being trans isn’t real, being plural isn’t real, being genderfluid isn’t real, being bigender or another gender entirely isn’t real. (Not that you are claiming this.) As such, the admins there simply decided that there won’t be a line drawn. Let people do what they want. Heck, you could consider it “roleplaying” if you’re more comfortable with that, or alternatively, simply don’t engage. It’s disrespectful and not to mention disruptive to make it an issue.
It was never a requirement that serious expressions of identity be real?
Yes. Them’s the rules on Blåhaj Lemmy.
I mean, apparently so, but I was not operating under the assumption that “We don’t believe in gender, this is all roleplay” was the base state of the instance, and many others seem surprised by it too.
What part of the removed comments do you think was considered gatekeeping by the admins, if not the statements that dragons aren’t real?
Then any interaction in that superposition of reality and fiction is pointless. Acknowledgment of reality will be arbitrarily censored, such as above. It ceases to be roleplay and becomes a localized Ministry of Truth with the admins kowtowing to the trolls.
People wanted to state the obvious about objective reality. Admin did not let them do that. People wanted to distinguish between reality and fiction. Admin did not let them do that.
Disrespectful to whom? Trolls? Reality?
By questioning the person’s neopronouns, you’re gatekeeping which identities or pronouns are acceptable. Nobody cares whether dragons are real or not. Many letters of the alphabet mafia have been questioned on whether they are real or not, and even continue to be, so over here, we’re simply not doing that.
As for why you’re being disrespectful: You broke the rules of the space and now you’re making a big stink about it. Considering you’re admitting yourself you think this person is a troll, I think it’s time to admit your loss. You “fell” for them, got “tricked” into breaking a rule, and got banned as a result.
Have y’all never seen assholes abuse the language of sexual preference?
We’ve had to deal with people insisting that fucking kids is their identity. NAMBLA was a whole thing, to the point it became a South Park episode and a running gag on the Daily Show. Over on Tumblr, people tried pushing “minor-attracted person” or MAP as just another humdrum flag under the rainbow. If any forum said ‘you will not question that or imply the slightest disagreement with that,’ would you suddenly respect those people?
Hell, 4chan tried pushing “super straight” to mean, only cis women count. This was a deliberate organized effort (by 4chan standards) to appropriate the shape of queer activism, specifically to shit on trans people. As if calling those bigots, bigots, was the real bigotry.
Some things are not sexual preference. Calling that gatekeeping, instead of just having a definition, is a thought-terminating cliche. Acceptability has nothing to do with it - this thing is not that thing. It’s a category error.