See, Lemmy is a relatively small platform. There are pretty few active users here. Moderators should occasionally bend the rules if people are having fun and post or comment is in good faith. We shouldn't moderate like robots; if I wanted that, I'd use Reddit or another meta platform. If we start banning every user and blocking each other, this place will become quiet and lonely. We should act like a community, not a big shitty corpo social media platform.
Also, my comment on news of archive.org getting hacked and DDOS. (I said "People who are doing this fucking die") on !technology@lemmy.world. I know, my comment is not in good faith but I have no sympathy for people who want to destroy information and knowledge.
While I agree that good-faith posts that don't necessarily fit could be left alone, where do you draw the line?
Usually a community has clear rules and if these rules are flexible, stuff gets a bit complicated when people get warnings, mutes, or bans.
Personally I think bans are a bit harsh and a mute / timeout for a while is often enough to deter bad faith posters. Repeated offenders would still get a ban, obviously.
For what it's worth, unless I see something especially egregious, I moderate this community based on reports. If no one seems to have an objection with what is posted here I leave it alone.
Reason:Β Rule 4: This is not a forum to complain about moderation actions/policies in other communities. Rules exist for a reason, and even though communities and user bases may be small, it is no reason to invite anarchy.
Yea, That was my entire point. We should bend rule sometime. I am not saying just go full blown Anarchy-No Rule. If someone is fucking Nazi we should ban them immediately.