Experimenting with a signature containing some quotes from moderators I have received. See my profile background for the groomer bit. Itβs either true or itβs something that they shouldnβt be making light of by pretending to be one. Not sure how else to raise these issues.
Thatβs unfortunate. I mean, letβs acknowledge that admins to an extent need to protect mods, and again that mods do labor for free. Lots of mods do the work they do because they want the communities they cherish to flourish.
But letβs also acknowledge that there is such a thing as user churn and that will ultimately be the downfall of any site. With enough money you can burn through the churn indefinately. Volunteer sites will just disconnect and users will go to the for-profit sites like reddit, causing more users to be tracked, the internet to be more centralized, etcβ¦
I think itβs also worth mentioning that mods can create their own burner accounts and use those to troll users. Mods are also humans and if they want to speak their minds they should be able to do so. But, speaking their minds from a position of power puts them in a different power dynamic from users, which reflects not only on them, but on the community and the instance as a whole.
And then users get to see literal scat porn on the front page from a username like βadmins are assholesβ because a mod wanted troll on main. (edit: this was an actual bit of content I reported not too long ago. maybe it was βmods are assholesβ Iβm not sure, but it was long that vien.)
I can but as a user and not a moderator or admin it wonβt make much difference. I also donβt expect mods (volunteers with a stack of work to do in front of them) to take the time to understand every user before reporting them, though it would be nice if there were a system that facilitated that!
For example, if users (not just comments) were able to be upvoted/downvoted, they could gain or lose βstandingβ in a community or on an instance. Depending on how much standing they have, their posts / comment would have a visibility in line with their standing. Good standing posts might be promoted slight more than regular posts. Poor standing posts might be shown to users half as much as regular posts. The scope of this would be per community, based on the usersβs interaction with that community and the communityβs opinion of the user.
That way, less of the moderation is placed on the human moderators. Those moderators will still be needed because no automated or crowd-sourced system is perfect but the goal would be to lean on moderators less and less.
No worries. I make the distinction between people referring to me and people agreeing with my self-deprecation in the context of me making a good-faith comment or argument. The former is fine. The later is, well apparently itβs trolling, Iβm learning.
Oh absolutely. Not to mention that if we want to get pedantic and legal, at least for reddit circumventing bans breaks ToS and you canβt accept the terms of the site if youβve already been banned from it. Can you technically do it? Yes absolutely. Will your new account be shadowbanned? Probably, but thatβs not to say you couldnβt circumvent that as well when creating the account.
Iβm only talking about the rules of one instance here, not the fediverse as a whole. I donβt think we should prevent people from creating instances, and I know we donβt have the power to do so. Lemmy is open source, so someone could try to sneak in code that would prevent certain instances from being setup, but it probably wonβt get accepted and those people could still use an earlier veresion. These are all good, healthy things.
Youβre absolutely correct that a medication isnβt going to react the same for every person. People can have weird or even fatal reactions to medications. Any local pharmacist should be able to answer questions about medications and interactions.
To be clear, I am just saying that if adderall works for someone, vyvanse is likely to work for that person as well, because the drugs are so similar. Vyvanseβs biggest difference from adderall is that itβs a prodrug, meaning that starts off as a drug that has no effects on the body until it reacts with an natural enzyme we have in our colon which causes the drug to turn into what is basically adderall.
Adderall is mixed amphetamine salts.
The mixture is composed of equal parts racemic amphetamine and dextroamphetamine, which produces a ratio between dextroamphetamine and levoamphetamine, the two enantiomers of amphetamine.
Compared to vyvanse:
Lisdexamfetamine is an inactive prodrug that is converted in the body to dextroamphetamine, a pharmacologically active compound which is responsible for the drugβs activity.
So technically, Adderall is dextroamphetamine and levoamphetamine. I canβt speak more to this because of my lack of knowledge but βdextroβ and βlevoβ are βrightβ and βleftβ, basically meaning something like the left and right βversionsβ (wrong word) of the molecule. Vyvanse on the otherhand is just the right βversionβ (wrong word) of the molecule.
This is tricky tooβ¦ I havenβt looked at your comment history so Iβm willing to accept that maybe you did something somewhere to upset this mod. This may not be the case but if it was and that was the reason you were banned, that presents a few problems:
youβre seemingly contributing value to that community. that should, in a perfect world, remain in that community.
to the extent that you are the baddie, should your well-behaved valuable posts still be considered valuable?
Or to pose the question another (hypothetical, not referring to you) way: should we let a nazi/far-right/facist remain a contributor to a leftist tech support community so long as they are not antagonistic to other users / abide by the rules of that community? I donβt have a clear answer here. I think most people would agree that itβs fair to allow this if the person is truly not antagonistic and is adding value. Other people might say that that person doesnβt deserve to exist in polite society no matter what βvalueβ they might add.
Thatβs an extreme example, but Iβm trying to strongman the modβs possible reason for banning you.
Another thing for a moderator code of conduct might be to provide adequate ban reasons, possibly generalizing some only in cases of safety / legal reasons. I mean, mods / admins shouldnβt need to write a novel, but it also wouldnβt be technically too difficult to create a page that would link to the specific posts which were removed or which lead to the banning. I realize Iβm butting up against outing reporters, so it would be important to maintain that aspect of privacy. Iβm just saying when someone says something like βrepeatedβ in a mod report, it would be handy to see the multiple instances. Otherwise, a mod might just look at someoneβs moderation history, see mod reports (which may be unfair) and determine those reports constitute βrepeatedβ behavior.
Experimenting with a signature containing some quotes from moderators I have received. See my profile background for the groomer bit. Itβs either true or itβs something that they shouldnβt be making light of by pretending to be one. Not sure how else to raise these issues.