gofsckyourself

The facts are presented as neutral because they exist and are neutral.

The moderator deleted messages to hide their negative response, including messages that broke no rules citing a non-existent rule for the reason. They found out that the mod logs are public after they were called out for misusing their moderator powers by deleting messages that broke no rules. Then immediately deleted their account and complained about it on mastodon, very clearly stating that their issue was that mod logs are public.

If you think that those facts somehow change because of the context, then that's on you. You're just flat wrong.

Also it's "bury the lede" 🙂

So, the facts are somehow not facts because of the source they came from?

You're insane.

Lol your argument is that the mod abuse is somehow okay because it wasn't against someone else?

Why should any amount of mod abuse be okay, forgotten, or 'let go'?

You've spent way too much time arguing a shitty position that really has no effect on you. Then you say I need to ' let it go'?

The irony is too sad to be funny. I feel sorry for you.

So, because I copied my messages from before explaining the situation in an attempt to educate people about the toxic behavior of the website owner? Should I have wrote a whole new comment instead? Should I just keep quiet and let toxic people not reap the consequences of their actions?

Okay, bud.

No snark was intended, but I can see why people could interpret it poorly. I won't claim to be perfect at communicating over Lemmy comments.

I've provided plenty of evidence, and there is more to be found if you feel like you need it. Do you really expect me to provide an exhausting dissertation on every single detail of the situation? I provided just enough to back up my claims. If you feel you need more, that's on you and it's available for you to find. That does not warrant your baseless accusations.