Editing the title would rewrite or paint Rimu as someone who tried to hide something or told something else.

I think it is better to let as it is, they will read the title and the comments for what they are. Then like you, they will understand.

Finally, just because I included an LLM summary of the comment history in the public modlog, it does not logically follow that the ban occurred because of the LLM summary. It simply happened to correspond very well to my own manual review

• you claim you had a manual review process, but never show your work. (If you did, where is it?)
• you imply you didn't use the LLM to ban the user, but you don't say it outright.

That's a you problem. I never accepted your attempt to reframe the conversation.

Its what I have said from.the start, I don't really care about your attempt to reframe it.

No, it's not.

"Wahhh, its using quotes, that means exact"

Uh huh. Sure thing.

I said quite clearly that I'd like to see the comment misquoted.

That's a you problem. I never accepted your attempt to reframe the conversation.

your complaint is about punctuation

No, it's not.

You then quoted the summary and said "BUT IT USED QUOTES"

They paraphrase. I said that, too. Your complaint is about punctuation, probably the dumbest complaint ive seen on this entire thread.

So cut the crap, stop lying about what I said, and stop pretending that it was an inaccurate summary.

Holy shit are you dense.

I'm almost impressed that you can lie this hard while acting correct.

Date: 2026-03-15T10:53:32.311868Z
Comment ID: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/24299783
Post ID: 519441
Community ID: 45

Just because they are minors, doesn’t make them innocent by default.

The whole article is devoid of details on how these drones are used.

========================================

Whats the prob Bob?

Claims that “minors are not innocent by default”

Now show us exactly where this exact quoted text in the comment dump. With links, the things you swear you have!

It is chock full of examples of such behaviour, along with hyperlinks to the offending comments.

The ban log makes it unclear whether the comments are all offending, or even supposed to be. Was the user banned for this?

Date: 2026-04-17T13:51:01.747786Z
Comment ID: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/24890311
Post ID: 591643
Community ID: 351

When the Molly hits just right.

If there was a full review of source text that was summarised by an LLM then it wasn’t needed

You go through every single users comment?

Do you realize how long that would take?

I disagree, its a huge time saver.

This guesswork was done by a black box ran by OpenAI.

Local qwen, summarized with receipts.

I consider libb's reply less disengaging and more enrage and block, which I consider inappropriate for a mod to do.

Regarding the larger bit with rimu and this post in general (not what my comment was about, but I'll elaborate since you took the time to do so as well), the issue - for me - comes down to veracity.

I think its perfectly appropriate to call out bad actions. I have no problems whatsoever expressing my disappointment with the FAF when it has come up, which has been rare, and expressed those thoughts without any issue whatsoever. One example being a discussion about defederation, where some of the examples shown should/would have been removed anyway due to the rule breaking contents.

Anyway, for me, claims like this should be met with a pinned post that they haven't been verified, and each user should review and consider accordingly.

For example - is there a tool using an llm reviewing comments at request of a user? Yes, easily proven.

Is it an automod? No. That claim is unverifiable with what has been shared, and not even remotely indicated by what was shared, making the bulk of this post conjecture.

As for the points (I'm going to skip ones I filly understand and agree with to not make this too long, because I have a feeling you are already occupied with keeping an eye out for rule breaking behavior):

have a mixed opinion on AI. I use it for subtitle or transcript. There are pro and cons. Dbzer0 stated they don't use it, or run a local one on you computers. I believe them.

Same. They definitely run locally, as do I, the api horde has been a publicly available tool for a long time. I'm very much against corp. ai, but perfectly fine with local use.

But our post are public and we check user's history before taking decision.

And most importantly, none of that is different here. Everything else in this post is just wild speculations and blatant fear mongering. Which is the issue I have with this post, and why I think a pinned comment is appropriate.

As for the discussion between Unruffled and Libb, It's better to let them alone.

Again, I was more referring to their interaction with db0.

Flat out inappropriate, no excuses that are valid there IMO.

Thank you.

I don't want to take side. It was posted by the Admin of Piefed.social and raised an issue on how we handle the moderation part. This post is also there because someone asked why Rimu doesn't post in !fediverse@piefed.social.

• I haven't be able to diggest this enormous raw of informations. I prefer taking my time and read them slowly outside the current debate.
• Both Rimu and Dbzer0 can counter-arguments, expose their facts and users can decide. I'm watching. I will lock the post later so i can take a break.
• As for myself, I would have handled differently.
• I have a mixed opinion on AI. I use it for subtitle or transcript. There are pro and cons. Dbzer0 stated they don't use it, or run a local one on you computers. I believe them.
• I understand why people would feel their privacy was invaded, i'm one of these. The reason we left Reddit was for spez locking up API and later corpoAI. But our post are public and we check user's history before taking decision.
• I also understand why mods would use this tool. It is covenient, fast but that's not how i would handle or imagine the moderation part.

Maybe my opinion would change overtime if i was managing a bigger instance.

As for the discussion between Unruffled and Libb, It's better to let them alone.

If Libb want to disengage from the current discussion, so let it be. I don't think it is worth to insist and ask him to discuss when he doesn't want to.

Maybe they both missed an interesting discussion and misunderstood each other ? Maybe later they could share their ideas, books and define part of anarchy in the 21 century ? Maybe they will completly disagree ? Dunno.

Maybe, they could also imagine a disengage tool where anyone, not only mods, can lock their own threads and tell users "i don't want to continue this discussion."

Right now, It is not the right time. It's not the right place for a talk between libb and unruffled.

So i'm waiting for a better moment and that we cool down.

Like, context is important here. The piefed dev knows exactly whats going on and who these individuals are, especially the user in question that got banned.

It's an ugly look for sure.