Comment

Comment on Mastodon.social shadowbanned me and there's no way to contact anyone about it

30p87@feddit.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

I should’ve included more context:

“Someone on mastodon.social reported me for supposedly supporting the German right-wing party.” […] Even though nowhere in their rules it says anything about this even being any offence."

3: […] Support for violent groups

They, openly for years, and now officially, are extrimists and their members systematically violent.

And I just noticed that, as so often with deepl, it first detected the german text as english, therefore translated (english)german to german, and malformed it, so in my working copy it read “meinen” instead of “mein”. Should have double checked that, but >01:30 CET demands its tribute.

source

Sort:hotnew top

mbirth@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
Keyword: supposedly

Because that’s what it said in the report my instance has received. Somebody on the moderation team made the same mental gymnastics you did. Just because I’ve questioned the stated conclusion of a report that was kept secret from the public. Nothing else. Nowhere did I say that I support that party. I just don’t like blindly trusting what politicians (and their government institutions) announce without giving any challengeable proof.

Their status as extremist as per that report mentioned in my toot has been revoked/put on hold until a proper court case: German news article

If it was as crystal clear as you make it out, why revoke it?

(These days, the constitutional courts of all the states try to get that status reinstated in their respective states. But that wasn’t a thing back when I did this toot.)

source
- 30p87@feddit.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  They say/write “they banned for X, but I didn’t do X”, instead of “they banned me for X, but X isn’t even forbidden”, even though it clearly is.
  
  As I said, the report itself is just a compilation of publicly known and collected information. You’d be essentially distrusting that 1 + 1 = 2, because the 5 page mathematical proof is no open to the public. Of course, the actual proof that 1+1=2 is open, but you hopefully get the point.
  
  The VS is completely independent. There are no politicians behind it. Otherwise, the whole thing wouldn’t make sense. Even your source says so.
  
  The status hasn’t been revoked at all. That’s a common misconception. It’s not being taken back, obviously. They are just not calling them extremist openly, until there is a first decision in the lawsuit. Just as any other lawsuit for eg. defamation, no matter which side is on the right - you’ll first be ordered to stop openly calling the other party a liar or similar, or stop doing that by yourself. Again, your source literally states this.
  
  source
  - mbirth@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    
    The VS is completely independent.
    
    §7 BVerfSchG:
    
    Die Bundesregierung kann, wenn ein Angriff auf die verfassungsmäßige Ordnung des Bundes erfolgt, den obersten Landesbehörden die für die Zusammenarbeit der Länder mit dem Bund auf dem Gebiete des Verfassungsschutzes erforderlichen Weisungen erteilen.
    
    or in English:
    
    The federal government can, if there is an attack on the constitutional order of the Federation, give necessary orders to the highest Federal State authorities for working together with the Federation in terms of protection of the constitution.
    
    source