Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

ziq wrote (edited )

We can't expect others to understand our personal ethics when they're informed by our own unique experiences and desires.

My decision to remove an ML from a position of power using my defasher account to shine a light on her actions before removing her with my admin account was an attempt to minimize backlash against raddle from what I knew was a vengeful clique.

Admins are always treated by collectivists as if they are synonymous with the entire site, and anything an admin does that people don't like is used to destroy the site.

My actions were considered immoral by most of this community. I'm still chastised for it constantly, with people even going as far as to call me a sociopath.

But to me; my decision was completely justifiable under my own ethical standards. My realization that her politics; her words and actions as a mod presented an imminent danger to raddle, led to me performing what I saw as the only viable solution to safeguard the integrity of the site.

I did a 'bad' thing in service of what I saw as being far more important concerns. I was guided by an informed fear of MLs historically hijacking leftist spaces and destroying them.

I wasn't trying to hurt anyone. It was a wholly ethical decision in my head, and I don't expect anyone else to understand that when their experiences with the user in question, MLs in general, and their personal ethics may be wholly different from my own.

After 4 months of constant fury, doxxing, hijacking of chat rooms and attempts to hack raddle to take it offline coming mainly from her clique of friends after I came clean - I think I've shown myself i was justified in my 'immoral' action to separate my true feelings from my admin account. To use proxies to voice my concerns about real problems. Everything I feared would happen happened after I came clean. My only solace after having to step down as admin is knowing that the current admins are both anarchists and I don't have to worry about a genocide-denying ML constantly trying to make rules to ban criticism of Stalin.

I'm not a sociopath or a villain. I can only follow my own ethical convictions. My every instinct tells me I made the right choice.

2

TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

You're rewriting history dude

morals and ethics don't mean anything when we're talking about not respecting the rules that we had as a small community. The unsaid rule you broke was manipulating votes and making yourself untrustable to users, as an admin. It was never explicited and I understand that some nero-atypical folks may not get the cue if it's not 100% explicit but you still knew you did "bad" since you were guilty and came out.

People dont resent you because you did "immoral" stuff, but because you fooled them. Most of us are here because we want a chill place where we arent bullshited by the admins. Lo a behold, you were as trustable as a reddit admin. If you just banned her and explained it the next day in meta, everything would have been almost fine.

also prob the heated arguemts with chomskyist where some folks got emotionally involved wiith a straw-man didnt help your case.

0

ziq wrote (edited )

There was no vote to mod or demod her. I appointed her as an emergency measure when we were under heavy brigade without consulting anyone other than emma. I removed her privileges the same way. I wasn't going to ask anyone's permission to take away temporary privs, I'm the one who was legally liable for all the kiddie porn the spammers were posting (site is registered in my name) and I added her to handle the night shift during the brigade to protect myself both legally and health-wise from not being able to sleep because I had to stay up to deal with the constant porn spam. It was really no one else's decision and I never claimed appointing admins was a democracy.

I never banned her.

This thread is addressed to the user that said earlier I have no conscience and their moral code makes them better than me

2

TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

sorry about the wrong vocab, you're right you never banned her, idk why i said that, probably meant banned from admin-ing.

I agree with your decision: it it normal, as an admin, to take decisions that will anger some users. I disagree with the way you handled it, but you prob know that so there isnt much to say anymore.

I missed that one, it probably explains your post then.

1

selver wrote

You don't think that the erosion of trust & general disengagement from the site outweighs ridding the site of one ML? You couldn't have possibly gone about it a better way? Open dialogue instead of underhanded manipulation?

1

ziq wrote (edited )

I don't think giving her devoted friends the opportunity to enshrine her permanently as an admin would have been a good idea. They would have won any vote I triggered to remove her powers and it would have legitimized her position and resulted in the site being destroyed like every site MLs take over. I tried to handle it by shifting the 'blame' for removing her powers to my non admin account to avoid the drama. I don't really care if it was underhanded, I have no faith in people to be able to handle being stripped of their power. They've tried real hard to destroy this site for months and it wouldn't have been any different if I had asked their permission to remove her and then done it anyway after all her friends said no.

0

SouthsideGrackles wrote

The use of instinct as a basis for "right" is very moralistic. The use of ethics as a rationalization to justify your actions and the self righteous pursuit of whatever you want is also in line with the behavior of moralizers.

0

ziq wrote (edited )

Making the right choice for me isn't moralistic. If you don't do what you think is best for yourself and your site then what are you doing exactly? Should I make my choices for the 'common good' or whatever? No thanks. I don't even like most people.

I don't need to justify my actions to anyone, that's not what this is about and I should have never fallen into the "forgive me for betraying your impossible moral standards please" trap.

And you're one to talk about moralizing when it's all you do here and all you did on reddit. At least I'm honest that I do what I do because it suits me best and don't try to wrap it up in abusive moralist bullshit like your "I have to protect everyone from you, you evil manipulative sociopath literally Trump you worthless trash destroyer of anarchy so I'm going to follow you around and rant about you for 2 years to protect your innocent brocialist victims" shtick.

1

rot wrote

I think the concept of what you consider best for yourself is informed by moralistic values and could be considered a type of morality. Self-sacrifice for the "greater good" is held as a moral stance by some. Similarly, individualism is considered a moral value.

0

ziq wrote (edited )

Deliberate self interest isn't moral values or literally everything anyone ever does can be described as moral values. It's only moralizing when you pretend you're doing it for pious reasons.

-1

SouthsideGrackles wrote

"I don't need to justify my actions to anyone"

And yet, look how hard you're trying to do so in this thread.

Plus, the main point is that you're acting in a very moralistic sort of way, where you still believe in "right" and see yourself and your actions as righteous, and those that disagree as "other" , against whom all actions are justified.

You're still a huge moralist, and it is even more insidious than most morality because you don't even acknowledge its existence.

As a post leftist myself I'm honestly embarrassed for you and your lack of self awareness in regards to what you're saying and how you are warping an anti-moralistic perspective into a moralistic one in order to justify your actions as "right".

There is no "right".