Oh wow. You genuinely don’t see it? I gave you too much credit.

I don’t owe you anything. You’ve proven that your intent here is to be a pathetic troll.

The pure ironic hypocrisy is just 🤌

Well, there was an implication that they were good points, though I can see now that was unintentional.

Consider how the phrase “you’ve got a point” is often used to describe a valid point worth considering. I would consider “a valid point worth considering” a worthy definition of “a good point.”

You’re now participating in what was described in db0 as a “brigade”. Especially with your disingenuous “”“summary”“” of events.

How much more hypocrisy can you db0 people rack up here?

Well that would be nice if at least that was being upheld.

But the point of being held to a higher standard is because trust is an important factor. If an admin can’t handle themselves better than the average person, then they shouldn’t be entrusted with the responsibilities they carry. That’s a standard that is equal for all people. If you are entrusted with responsibility that requires a higher than normal amount of trust, then you are expected to handle yourself in those situations better than the average person

/–edit–/

You also just ignored the other point, the main point, so that you can virtue-signal how much of an anarchist you are.

Based on your own actions, or lack of action, it doesn’t seem you are here with genuine intent and instead it seems you are here more for damage control.

I would agree with you if the rudeness was at a similar level, or if the claims made in response weren’t absolutely unfounded.

Not to mention a moderator, let alone an admin, should be held to a higher standard.

I don’t see how those are mutually exclusive points.

By “too much credence” I mean giving it more credit than it deserves. As in making it seem like it can do more than it’s currently capable of. “Too much” does not mean “any”.

Just like misinformation and disinformation, the information itself should not be given any credence, but the impacts of spreading it is that it takes significantly more effort to counteract than it does to spread it. In the case of AI, giving the same level of a platform provides an easy entry for low-quality or false-information content that’s AI generated to overpower more thoughtful content at a rate that is difficult to combat.

No big. There’s a lot of idiosyncrasies to Lemmy that are unintuitive. I wouldn’t expect everyone to be familiar with all of them.

I don’t disagree with you, but more importantly I don’t think that being a little bit instigative should be met with the treatment you received.

I do think the comment was somewhat instigative, but I don’t agree with how it was handled. I think it was an overreaction and that admin’s behavior elsewhere gives that a significant amount of validation.

now those communities won’t be in their feed.

Banning a user does not remove that community’s content from their feed.

it’s not really productive to downvote a community’s content on principle. That’s what the block button is for.

Definitely, provided that’s what actually happened.

I would agree that it’s a rational response as a way to protect the community from that kind of behavior.

I believe that as it currently stands, AI is too closely tied to big corporations, especially for the average person. So, without specifically including the caveat of “this thing was generated using an open source, locally run model” or something along those lines, it’s reasonable to assume it was generated by using big corp-run AI giving them more data and power over the individuals. I also think giving too much credence to AI gives the big techbro AI bubble more value and power. Additionally, AI makes it exceedingly easy for low-quality or nefarious content to proliferate and effectively choke-out thoughtful content, similar to how misinformation/disinformation takes over factual information. Like I mentioned, I agree that ‘AI is just a tool’, but that doesn’t exclude it from being extremely frequently abused, which then puts a sour taste in my mouth. I could go on for why I tend to dislike AI in general while acknowledging what possible benefits there may be for it. None of my reasoning is founded on any of the claims db0 users were trying to force onto me.

According to your fellow admin and other very loud and rude users from db0 (whose behaviors have been validated by the same admin), that makes me a “right-wing neoliberal”. Instead of engaging in a discussion about it, those people instead berated me and kept pushing the same idea.

/–edit–/

To add to this, I think a big contention point is that there is no rule against stating that you don’t like AI or reasons to dislike AI, but the user’s hostility were a reaction as if that were the case. If there were an instance or community rule for that, then these reactions would be understandable (though, still an overreaction IMO).

No, I’m certain I understand what you’re trying to say. It’s an overly distilled idea of the term “reactionary” to be “any kind of reaction”. You’re describing having a “reaction” in the sense of responding to information or stimulus, but that’s not what “reactionary” means.

It means being excessively predisposed to having a negative reaction, or to immediately jump to a negative reaction to some sort of change. It’s specifically negative in its definition. That’s why I say it’s an opinion, because it’s pushing a specific characterization that having any negative opinion of AI means you are merely acting based on an initial negative reaction, possibly or even likely based on a resistance to change, rather than having an opinion based on a real consideration of the idea and the circumstances around it.

Yes, I came across another post on this community and remembered it existed. After having a very recent experience that is relevant to the community, in that an instance admin is pushing an “AI or else” attitude, I thought it would be something people would be interested to hear about.

You’re making me second guess that your intention was to be an asshole. But, now that I think of it, it could be both!

When an instance admin is pushing an “AI or else” attitude, I consider that relevant. Though, it does have a significant drama element to it. If that’s still not acceptable in spite of apparent relevance, just let me know and I’ll excuse myself.

Since I don’t think it would be right to assume you’re just stupid, the only explanation for mischaracterizing me is that it’s intentional in order to demean me and make it seem like you have some sort of valid reason for it.

You’re making some big assumptions on the intentions behind my actions. Apparently, to you, if you respond when you get a notification because people reply to your comments, that means a “tireless devotion”. I came across a post calling out the moderation actions of a thread I was a part of and commented on that, then shortly after I realized any meaningful discussion was never going to happen and I blocked the instance, I then come across a post on “fuck_AI” and thought I had a very relevant experience to post here. And now I am on a “crusade”.

Well, it’s a good thing you only have intentions of being an asshole, because the alternative would require being pretty damn stupid.

It was well written and made some points

Gonna have to disagree with you on both parts of that.

I blocked the instance, but I had already taken a screenshot.

But I went out of my way to get this for you:
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/43426671/18476015

No. To put it very simply, having an opinion about something is not reactionary. It seems you are distilling down the concept of “reactionary” too much, and by that definition any human interaction is “reactionary” which makes it lose any meaning and then becomes a useless term.

You really don’t need to see any more than what’s provided to see how clear it is that I’m not talking past anyone, considering how insane the take is from the start.

But, here’s an overview:

• People made a ridiculous claim.
• I disagreed saying that it’s wrong to lump people together like that.
• They doubled down without any logic or arguments.
• I requested an explanation.
• The admin responded for them with this list, which clearly has no foundation in facts or reality and didn’t even really address the main point. And also continued to make preposterous assumptions.

I literally did make many points in response to that comment. But the comment itself does stand up to that description.

Additionally, it seems we’ve got a db0 brigade. Gross.