im so sick of seeing reports regarding men posting in women-only communities and i cant help but get annoyed with these guys.

the rules are clearly presented. either youre not paying attention or youre just an asshole who purposefully throws their opinion in a place explicitly not wanting it.

what the fuck is wrong with you guys?

  • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    “The rules are clearly presented”

    WRONG! Posts show up in aggregate lists. You know, like the main page of lemmy instances. Where individual community rules do not appear at all if someone clicks on the post directly. I bet a significant amount of the time, people do not even realize which community they’re replying to posts in.

    Don’t like it? Maybe Lemmy needs a way to either remove communities from standard aggregate lists, or to force a popup of community rules when a post is navigated to for a first time viewer that hasn’t even seen the community page. Then I’d totally understand being pissed off at first time rule violators.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      There’s no way to “force” anything, different clients are going to behave however they like. Maybe if you need that level of control the Fediverse isn’t the right platform to begin with.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Hey, it’s not my desire to have a wholly separate space for a subsection of the community… It’s not my fault OP doesn’t understand the consequences of public message boards. I’m just suggesting ideas that might get closer to their desired mixed reality.

        Obviously if they want to do it correctly, it’d have to be something like a separate women-only instance with approved joins. Then they’d be able to facilitate a space where undesirables cannot post.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Knowing which community isn’t the same as being familiar with that community’s rules. Most are going to assume if they see it they can respond in some sort of “normal” fashion. Banning an entire subsection that can still see the community by rule only is asking to have a difficult to enforce rule. Complaining that a difficult to enforce rule is difficult is … a major lack of self-awareness.

        • Knowing which bin isn’t the same as being familiar with that bin’s rules. Most are going to assume if they see it they can dispose of waste in some sort of “normal” fashion. Banning an entire subsection that can still fit in the bin by rule only is asking to have a difficult to enforce rule. Complaining that a difficult to enforce rule is difficult is … a major lack of self-awareness.

          ~A person who throws food waste in the recycle

      • loudwhisper@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Because it’s unnecessary in almost all cases. So far there is only one community which forbids people to comment based on who they are, but otherwise the rules boil down to standard acceptable behavior according to common sense. It’s also a nuisance for users: I am quite sure nobody wants to click several times and be derailed to check rules (on mobile) for every comment they want to write in every post they see on a feed. If this would be expected as standard behavior, I would guess even less interactions will happen.