Rimu published yet another hit piece against the /0 instance and this time posted it in his own instance comms as well. One of his mods jumped in, admitted they don’t know anything about anything, but nevertheless felt confident enough to state their opinion as fact and in the process insult all of us collectively, then stickied his opinion for good measure.

So I decided to reply sarcastically, at which point that mod insulted me and locked the thread, which is apparently a feature in piefed which simply hides/deletes further replies in that thread, but since it’s not a feature in lemmy, it appears to function like a shadow delete.

This is what my last reply would have been.

(Yes I’m being snarky, but that “I’m so mature” bullshit just rubs me the wrong way.)

In my opinion, using mod powers to get the last insult in, is just bastard behaviour.

  • curbstickle@anarchist.nexusEnglish
    163·
    10 days ago

    Bullshit you just fucking did.

    I said AI is handy to summarize. You said use it to moderate. Normally I’d just block someone like you, but I want to make sure I can report you when you lie again.

    • XLE@piefed.socialEnglish
      513·
      10 days ago

      I said AI is handy to summarize

      …for making moderation decisions. Using AI in the moderation process instead of a human review. That’s so extreme not even Flatworm (The person who generated the AI report) is willing to claim they did.

      It’s weird you turned into such a pedant after telling me words in quote marks don’t need to be exact quotes. Selective outrage I guess

      • Unruffled [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        15·
        10 days ago

        It’s not an either/or situation. I manually reviewed it, came to a conclusion, then generated the AI summary to see if it was any good. And then I manually banned that user. You are implying a much bigger role for AI than it actually played.

        • XLE@piefed.socialEnglish
          37·
          10 days ago

          Does that mean the ban reason in the mod log isn’t the ban reason?

          • What value did you get out of the AI generation when deciding on the ban (assuming none based on your reply)?
          • Maybe more importantly, what value are you attributing to it for those who actually read the logs?

          Were the quotes in the AI summary actually used for “seeing if it was any good” at the time, and if so, what was the concision?

      • curbstickle@anarchist.nexusEnglish
        163·
        10 days ago

        LYING AGAIN.

        Using AI to summarize and find the comments, then a person reviews, which I said HOURS before you commented.

        Stop making shit up.

        • XLE@piefed.socialEnglish
          413·
          10 days ago

          A person reviews… The summary? The one with incorrect quotes (which doesn’t bother you for some reason)? Even Flatworm claims the AI summary was not used in their moderation decision.

          the summary did a much more comprehensive justification of the ban than I could have fitted in the modlog, so why not include it?

          You can keep being pedantic, but you’re calling for more AI in the moderation than even db0 admins want to endorse.

          • curbstickle@anarchist.nexusEnglish
            121·
            10 days ago

            You check a summary, which makes specific references. Which you can then use to find the exact comments.

            Otherwise you have to manually look page by page through comments.

            If this concept is hard for you, a remedial English class may help. Its how many documents get written, and would be reviewed in such a class.

            • XLE@piefed.socialEnglish
              39·
              10 days ago

              Thank you for explaining how you want administrators to use AI even more than they (allegedly) already do. You don’t need to keep going