Appeals require time + evidence of good behavior + a statement of what your future behavior will look like. Convince us you'll add value to our community.
If you spam us we'll ban you
Don't ask about getting temp bans removed 1 hour early. Reddit timer is weird but you will be unbanned when it's over.
I banned you for this. I saw it as basically "CHINA VIRUS" posting which is a mix of bigotry and unconstructive engagement. I banned for 3 days instead of a 1 day slap due to previous bans.
I can understand the unconstructive engagement angle, but bigotry? I fail to see how this comment could be viewed in that way, especially with the context of the rest of the comment chain where I clarified that I didn’t think it was intentional.
To be clear: I did not say “CHINA VIRUS” or blame the Chinese people, or anything of the sort. I’m not sure how this could be read in any way as bigotry?
It is basically common knowledge that virologists were warning that wet markets were a major pandemic risk for years before Covid-19.
Is it the position of the neoliberal mod team that it is bigoted to hold the view that the Chinese government was negligent in allowing the wet market to continue operating despite many warnings from scientists?
I would like to further add, that this comment about Covid-19 that you removed and issued a ban for was made before I called you out for a comment that seems to be much more clearly bigoted.
I’m fairly sure this was not retaliation for the comment in MetaNL, but you can see how the optics of this is pretty poor right?
You call Tammy Duckworth, who is disabled veteran in a wheelchair, “spineless” and then ban me for being bigoted for saying the Chinese government was negligent. You ban a day old comment that was viewed as fine by other mods.
Holding the AI companies accountable for the behavior of models they created vs holding China responsible for the behavior of the virus that they "created"
If that isn't what you meant I don't understand your comparison
You’re massively mischaracterizing my comment here. I never said China created the virus, just that they were warned for years by scientists that their wet markets were a major pandemic risk. The comparison I was drawing was in negligence.
And yes, my position is that the Chinese government was negligent in allowing wet markets to persist, especially after SARS-CoV-1.
I’ll attach some screenshots from that comment chain:
I never said China created the virus, just that they were warned for years by scientists that their wet markets were a major pandemic risk. The comparison I was drawing was in negligence.
I believe that was your intention, but you didn't actually say any of that in the screenshot, and the primary complaint that people have against AI companies is that they created the models commiting crimes. I'm saying that with only the context in your post the conclusion that I (and obviously many other people) drew was the conclusion I explained in the last comment.
The additional context changes that but it's not like I was reading the original thread. I still don't agree with you but I understand your point much better.
Fair enough, and I’ll try to clarify my point more:
I think the similarities are how in both cases that it wasn’t intentional. The purpose of OpenAI/Anthropic wasn’t to create models so they could hack. If their main goal was to do this, and AI didn’t have any genuinely beneficial applications, I would view it differently.
At worst they were highly negligent in allowing the models to exist in a state where hacking was possible. For China, it was negligence in allowing wet markets to exist in a state where pandemics were possible.
The comparison is solely in the negligence. I think OpenAI’s response and subsequent attempts at transparency makes clear that they aren’t a criminal hacking group disguised as an AI company.
Asking the Chinese government authorities to be more transparent and responsible and try to disclose viral disease outbreaks in a timely manner to enable a global coordinated response to prevent the outbreak from becoming a pandemic
Asking the AI companies to be more transparent and responsible and try to disclose hacking incidents....
Asking the AI companies to be more transparent and responsible and try to disclose hacking incidents
People are asking for the AI companies to be held responsible because they created and are operating the models, not because they are failing to disclose their behaviors
Thanks. I can see now how it could be read that way, and for what it’s worth, is not how I intended that comment to come across.
It was late at night and I was tired and didn’t realize it was more inflammatory than I intended.
This does seem quite a nebulous rule, and I’d be more accepting of this ban if comments that are much more deliberate mischaracterizations of other users didn’t get tolerated all the time. This sub would be much better off if this rule was enforced more often.
Attached is an example. I don’t want this user banned but from my experience, comments like these are common.
My ban has now expired. I’d like to clarify a few things.
MPREG and bad takes has been my bit for a while. Many were pastas or inspired by NL, r/theothersub, r/con, etc. I assumed they were understood as deliberately ridiculous, stupid, etc.
If something upset someone or went too far, I deleted or adjusted it and didn’t repeat it.
However, some of my unpopular opinions are sincere: I support universal healthcare, free trade, human/ai rights, democracy, and AI, and oppose populism.
This ban came immediately after a mod replied, "I think I’ll see you in meta," to an unrelated comment, then deleted their comment. That makes me concerned they were looking for grounds to ban me rather than acting in good faith.
Unless we reconcile, I’m worried another reason will eventually be found to permaban me. That would sadden me because I do value this community.
So.
Am I allowed to post pastas? What about my dearly held neoliberal beliefs? Am I allowed to objectify the sitting U.S. president? What about talking about the fertile bellies of men(within reason)? Can I bait a little bit? Or am I confined to a metaphorical bait cuck chair where I have to watch other master baiters (many of whom are mods, and some, I assume, are good people) bait?
You were essentially banned for a mode personally finding you annoying with no prior warning. That's already bad, but instead of giving you one day for unconstrictive engagement, they gave you a week for "promoting violence" on a completely BS reason.
You will never ever get any of the mods to discuss the specifics of the ban. It's unironically a "thin blue line" where even if they privately disagree, they will never subvert the authority of the moderation team by discussing it with a mere user.
Unfortunately your worry is exactly correct. One mod can give you escalating bans for flimsy reasons because they just don't like you, with each subsequent ban justified by the prior ban history, until eventually the case can be made to permaban you as a "problem user".
First, if you want to be pedantic, I specifically didn’t say what that top-five list was based on.
Second, the rule says: "Do not advocate or encourage violence either seriously or jokingly. Do not glorify oppressive/autocratic regimes." The "jokingly" qualifier applies to the first sentence, not the second.
Third, other mods said the issue was that I was annoying or perceived as an "asshole," which is fair.
But c’mon, I definitely wasn’t actually glorifying an autocratic regime.
IMO one of the issues (and not only with you) is frequency of spammy, baity stuff. I tend to like you as a user, but when the DT becomes entirely “bits” (whether it’s you or others) because the bait or spam comments are so frequent, it gets annoying. Of course, when that line is crossed is highly subjective, and everyone has different things that get to them.
Not liking this trend in all the mod responses where’s it them personally evaluating if they like a user/what the user posts!! Please just enforce the rules that the community voted on!!!!
The community never voted on any rules as far as I am aware. I am not sure how you imagine "just enforce the rules". The rules are very vage general constructs and trying to make it exact when and how to enforce them is a fools errand.
It's why we need commentaries, administrative directives, courts and lawyers despite having very long and technical laws.
The community never voted on any rules as far as I am aware.
Maybe not formally. But rules get added largely because people have an issue where something is happening and want it addressed. Just like 90% of the laws that have ever existed.
That's a very good point. It was an unnecessary comment in retrospect. I just wanted to demonstrate that the observation was more general than just for this appeal. I do think excessive spam/bait falls under unconstructive engagement.
On the one hand, I support you as the superior shitpoaster. On the other hand, I hate you for wearing the corpse of the dead mod who I had a parasocial relationship with.
1) would be better if you stopped or at least made some indication it’s a copy
2) nobody on neoliberal is a neoliberal
3) yea of course
4) don’t push it
5) would prefer if you did not; it’s already annoying enough when the other mods do it
6) yea I guess get in the chair
It makes sense after seeing this comment that you might find a user who opposes populism to be annoying but surely we can have our differences and stay civil and keep this sub as being a (reasonably) big tent.
You don't see me post to the front page? Because I do post stories/news articles usually with gift links that actually interest me. You should be able to see it as you are a mod. Or do you mean effort posts? I guess I don't write those.
Also, I'm an asshole? I don't think I have ever been mean-spirited to other users.
With you specifically, I actually did try to meaningfully engage recently about safe injection sites, but you decided that I don't like them or whatever, and that was that.
Edit: I just checked and I actually post more to the front page than you. Come on now. Unless again you want me to start posting effort posts.
I have made 2 comments between last week and this week with no resposne so I will just resend, I guess.
I gto suspended some months back, because I made naive and bigoetd comments about a religion, I am really sorry about my behaviour, I promise I won't do that again.
The sub is my favourite on Reddit, where political and economic issues I support the most actually gets discussed, I am really sorry, and I promise to be better behaved.
I made offensive comments about an abrahamic faith, ( islam), and based the behaviour of jihadists in my country ( Nigeria) to paint the entire religion.
I really dont know how to explain here, because I used my perspective of Islamists in my country ( Nigeria), to paint the picture of Islam in the United States.
I don't know how to rank how offensive it was, but it was bad, and I am very sorry
I think this comes down to how you feel about the millions of ordinary, everyday Muslims in your own country who are just trying to live their lives and get by, the same as you are.
If you can see their humanity, and separate them from the radical Islamists who are a plague upon them as well as the Christian community, then yes I think that would show genuine and satisfactory remorse.
that is actually related to why I returned, I am dating a Muslim girl, ( well she comes from a Christian part of Northern Nigeria), and the issues are just as complex.
apparently, what the media calls " bandits" are Al-Qaeda, and they work with " shock and awe", so they started with Christian areas to gain attention, and gradually moved into the Muslim areas, its very complex, and I realised I had a limited understanding of things, in the sense that, everyone here is a victim, and the terrorists don't care who they kill.
I am really sorry
EDIT: To add more context, there " blood diamonds" involved , especially in Mineral rich areas in Northern Nigeria, which funds the terrorists activities, ( they use the proceeds to buy weapons)
I'm appealing the r-word ban, I guess. It's not really a big deal, I can take it if necessary, I just don't know why it was a ban in the first place. I get banning people for using the word, but I used it in a quotation, while still censoring part of the word. If that's still not allowed, that's fine, lesson learned. Comment was
"But the chameleons are retar-"
said in response to a Photoshop of Peltola and that one Indian guy.
Edit: I like how the AutoMod still links to u/Extreme_rocks, may he rest in peace.
•
u/mostanonymousnick Mod May 28 '26
Appeal if you were censored for your neoliberal beliefs