The plain and simple of it is that I’m not a good moderator. I have no idea what I’m doing. I wanted a community where people could post conservative stuff without it getting overwhelmed by lefty stuff, and then you could have discussions/arguments in the comment section. Bring to light stories that wouldn’t normally be seen on lemmy. Since that didn’t exist on lemmy, I had to do it myself.

Right now, there’s a lot of toxicity, some straight up telling people to kill themselves. My whole moderation policy was basically “So long as it isn’t a straight up slur, you could comment it”.

You’d think it’d be simple, just ban those who do that. Well, what about those who defend baby murder? I know lefties genuinely believe it isn’t, but I do. How do you tell what is horrible shit, when lefties act like horror movie monsters?

What about those who I’m like 90% sure are arguing in bad faith? I want to encourage discussions and arguments, and if I’m wrong, what then?

Me doing keyword-based moderating was a bad idea, but I am at a loss of how to do better, without breaking what this sub was supposed to be about.

I need ideas.

How should I moderate this community?

    • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
      52·
      1 year ago

      Conservatives donate blood and give to charities at a much higher rate.

      Which doesn’t mean shit when conservatives vote to leave families starving, on the streets, without medical treatment, and in poverty. Charity is not a solution to fundamental problems with society. Charity is not a solution, because it never addresses anything other than the symptoms. At it’s best, charity is a bandaid solution. At it’s worst, it is scummy as fuck (blood donations).

      Progressives vote to use their tax dollars, their own money, for social services. You’re comparing personal donations to personal donations when you instead need to be comparing personal donations and taxes to personal donations and taxes.

      It’s no coincidence that red states are the most poverty stricken.

      https://appliedsentience.com/2020/07/30/economics-are-red-or-blue-states-better/

      You solalistists are only generous with other people’s money.

      Socialized services are ultimately cheaper than privatized ones. We don’t need to be shelling out never ending money to the rich middlemen of private buisness to have basic social services.

        • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
          73·
          1 year ago

          Your claim that conceratives don’t care is absolutely false. Conceratives sacrifice more of their money, you liberals simply don’t care to help people on your own, you only want to help people with other’s money.

          This is basically just a copy-paste of what I’ve already addressed. So I won’t bother addressing this again.

          Though I will add, it seems that the real reason for this is religious community, not political affiliation:

          https://www.democraticaudit.com/2017/11/17/republicans-give-more-to-charity-but-not-because-they-oppose-income-redistribution/

          Take education public schools will spend $160,000 per student to educate them k-12. Private schools will do it for less than $100,000.

          When I say “cheaper” I don’t just mean the literal cost. Servicing a mail address in the middle of nowhere is often not profitable enough. There are diseases that are not profitable to treat/cure. There are students that private institutions would treat as a lost cause.

          But the cost of not having these services is huge. We need a functioning mail system, a healthcare system that heals people, and an education system that educates everyone.

          But even ignoring the external, nebulous costs, the literal cost is most always cheaper.

          The school one is an example that doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Those private institutions have to compete with the public ones, which means they can’t really fuck people over on the price too much. The other thing is that private schools don’t have enough of a market share to reach their end stage capitalism levels of price gouging. You’re comparing apples to oranges.

          Habitat for humanity homes cost ~$100,000 per home. HUD homes are more expensive on average and buyers get much better terms on their loan.

          Habitat for humanity is financially supported by the government, somewhere to the tune of $21,000,000,000 according to their website.

          https://www.habitat.org/costofhome/impact?keyword=promo1--home

          They also extensively work with local governments to bring costs down. Again you’re comparing apples to oranges.

          you’re not interested in a discussion.

          Believe it or not, I am here to speak honestly. My above response here was not a quick one to make. Trolls don’t put effort into responses.

            • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
              62·
              1 year ago

              I’ve given examples of this being fals but you’re not interested in a discussion.

              I literally gave you a response on why your examples do not support your conclusion.

              That’s how a discussion works.