The first sentence on the Wikipedia page for it calls it “a disputed medical condition.” Even the CIA itself has admitted that cases are not caused by “a sustained global campaign by a hostile power.” The State Department similarly released a report that it was highly unlikely the symptoms were caused by any sort of directed energy weapon. In fact, seven different US intelligence agencies released a consensus statement saying, “available intelligence consistently points against the involvement of US adversaries in causing the reported incidents.”

But the clowns on .world don’t care about things like truth or evidence, or even direct statements from the people who’s boots they have in their mouths. If it makes an enemy of the US look bad, then it is absolute truth, and anything short of complete faith and loyalty must be purged from conversation.

Rare video clip of a .world mod

Offending post

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    342·
    10 days ago

    I have no love at all for most of the LW mods, and mostly don’t go there. But I suspect that your comment was removed because it sounds unhinged and shouty, and is attempting in part to convince anyone who doesn’t already agree with you through sheer force of aggressiveness, rather than just citing why you think the story you’re commenting under is wrong / why you think it’s misinformation. It seems like anyone who wants to have a discussion with you from the opposing point of view is probably going to experience a lot more of the same, and so nothing productive will come of it.

    I don’t know if removing the comment entirely would be the right move, but it’s not indicative of opening a constructive dialogue on the topic with people there some of who will surely disagree with you.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlOP
      105·
      10 days ago

      It wasn’t removed for being shouty or aggressive, it was removed for “misinformation.” If the mods don’t like the tone, they should say so, and at least give me a chance to edit it. What they’re saying instead is, “This is indisputably proven true, there is no conversation to be had about this, and anyone claiming otherwise is a bad actor,” because that’s what a removal for misinformation means. Of course, they don’t have any evidence to back it up, because as I said, they don’t believe in sourcing claims or basing beliefs on evidence.

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        234·
        10 days ago

        Chipping in as a former mod. We get a lot of reports. At some point, huge long run on paragraphs like this will get skimmed over. We don’t have the time or capacity to dissect every thesis that gets reported. If it throws up red flags (and this one throws up a lot), we make a judgement based on that. Sorry, but that’s how modding works.

        • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
          10·
          10 days ago

          Also chiming in to say, if banning haphazardly is a consequence of not having enough mods, then maybe they should be getting more mods.

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
              4·
              10 days ago

              Ye I know, but typically if you don’t find mods like that, there’s also not a lot of traffic either to justify not taking the time, no?

              The of course doesn’t take into account super-mods, i.e. people modding dozens or comms, but that’s on them really.

                  • Blaze (he/him)@feddit.orgEnglish
                    3·
                    10 days ago

                    We are 3, the two first accounts are the same person. Most of the time there aren’t many reports, but then once in a while a “heated” topic comes up (usually wokism and representation in TV shows) and then you’ll get a few due to bigotry.

                    I just don’t know why people aren’t as interested in shows as in movies. !movies@lemm.ee has 2780 monthly active users, and we have 7 mods there.

                    Also, besides the “dealing with the reports” aspects of being a mod, there is also a “building the community”, and for that one I’m mostly alone. Again, a bit surprising seeing how popular that topic should be. On the other hand, !television@lemmy.world has no mods at all, so maybe it’s just a trend for the whole topic.

              • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
                3·
                9 days ago

                I used to mod r/Futurology, one of the default reddit subs. Hard to say how many actual users, but over 10M subscribed (inflated because we were a default sub). Even then we had trouble getting reliable mods who wouldn’t drop out after a month.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlOP
          73·
          10 days ago

          This wasn’t a huge run on paragraph, that’s just how things get displayed in the modlog.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        156·
        10 days ago

        I just read the comments there. The majority of the comments are agreeing with your viewpoint. Almost everyone thinks this news story is wrong, and they were all saying so. They just weren’t cocks about it.

        You were moderated for being shouty and unpleasant. Now, you’re being shouty and unpleasant here, and constructing a fiction where everyone is crazy liberal bootlickers trying to silence your truth, when everyone is way ahead of you on that particular truth, waiting for you to realize that they also agree with you.