I did some analysis of the modlog and found this:

V8lPrxY1qxcISLe.png

Ok, bigger instances ban more often. Not surprising, because they have more communities and more users and more trouble. But hang on, dbzer0 isn’t a very big instance. What happens if we do a ratio of bans vs number of users?

vyfUNYTrX9pHQeR.png

Ok, so lemmy.ml, dbzer0 and pawb are issue an outsized amount of bans for the number of users they have… But surely the number of communities the instance hosts is going to mean they have to ban more? Bans are used to moderate communities, not just to shield their user-base from the outside. Let’s look at the number of bans per community hosted:

Yrc7TofOr88SeGt.png

Seems like dbzer0 really loves to ban. Even more than the marxists and the furries! What is it about dbzer0 that makes them such prolific banners?

Raw-ish numbers and calculations are in this spreadsheet if anyone wants to make their own charts.

  • realcaseyrollins@hilariouschaos.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Ah I remember dbzer0, he led a harassment campaign against a Lemmy instance I used to run because he didn’t like some news articles I was posting.

  • حمید پیام عباسی@crazypeople.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Interesting that you chose ban when your favorite move is to just delete users you don’t like from the database on piefed.social and won’t show up in this dataset. Of course, you won’t see this reply because of that.

  • Godnroc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Analysis of potential causes aside, thank you for sharing such interesting data!

  • StarvingMartist@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    Wow some of y’all are pissy AF over literal data being shown to you. If you think it’s wrong then you have free will, put your money where your mouth is and do it better or stop yapping.

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    What happens if we do a ratio of bans vs number of users?

    We get a graph that compares two unrelated values?

    Unless this data is purely internal instance user bannings, ‘Per capita’ has no effective meaning. As the pawb.social case shows: it’s all one user with multiple communities who regularly bans waves of sockpuppet brigades. Even the people catching strays or otherwise goes to show it has nothing to do with ‘the furries’.

    Likewise I wager the SJW bans are effectively one community banning essentially one user who periodically spams accounts.

    What is it about dbzer0 that makes them such prolific banners?

    That whole painfully public fued against db0 over their stance on zionism may have something to do with it. Like the fake neo-nazi shit being spread against db0 that was just going on this week. It’s a wild question to have in light of all that, quite frankly.

  • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    Alternative view: Why is dbzer0 the only instance that holds people accountable for their actions? Why are all other instances letting things slide?

  • qaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Could you make a graph with defederations? I suspect that plays a role

  • PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    “Hey everyone, look at my juvenile attempts at statistics! Look how obviously bad some people seem when I do a shit job at it while ALSO failing to apply any context of the domain being studied to my thoughts, let alone to my ‘calculations’ and conclusions!”

    This is a terrible metric from the fucking jump. And you did a shit job of it from there. Fuck you, truly.

    [Edit: love how ya closed with “so who’s weirder guyz, the marxists, the furries, or the db0s?!” Just painfully obvious how you started the whole shebang, you hate all of the groups lol, because you’re a dumb asshole and not very happy about being one. Just remember, the option is always yours to simply shut the fuck up and read, then think, instead.]

  • w3dd1e@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    I just had my first reprimand and banning from a community for the first time in the 3 or so years I’ve been on Lemmy.

    I don’t regret it.

    I had no idea that Lemmy.ml believed the Uhygur genocide was a hoax. I decided to block all of Lemmy.ml as a result.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    dbzer0 literally has a community aimed at calling out power tripping mods, and instance admins regularly comment there to call out power tripping mods.

    I’ve never have been worried by being banned there by just normal posting.

    As they have already told you. This does not take into account the amount of harassment that some instances and communities have to endure.

  • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    its so funny how people complained about blahaj, the trans instance yet they dont ban very high at all, i suspect its alot of transphobic comments being directed towards the instance that are getting people banned.

    blahaj is up there likely due to signicant transphobia too.

    • Salamence@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      if you look at the modlog of every “blahaj is an authoritarian instance” user you will find they either keep misgendering people, talked over trans people and refused to be corrected or did things like denouncing neopronouns everytime

      • Jorunn (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah from memory most of our instance bans are gatekeeping and transphobia (and spam) which are the things we are the strictest on. We also notice that many transphobes are also bigoted or inflammatory in other ways as well, which makes sense as you wouldn’t notice someone with bigoted views unless they were very willing to voice those views.

      • BananaIsABerry@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        I am banned from a bunch of blahaj because I said that they were as bad as ml once. Never made any transphobic comments (nor am I, for the record).

        I was not surprised to see them so high up.

  • ryper@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    What makes you so sure the moderators are the problem, and not users? Maybe assholes gravitate toward certain instances, or people just don’t bother to check whether an instance’s rules match how tend to they post.

    • HubertManne@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      3 days ago

      Reading the comments I am wondering because a user from dbzer0 mentions problems with anti ai trolls and pawb I imagine has anti furry trolls. I also personally know of users that have a thing in their craw about .ml (cm0002 in particular whos alts make up a majority of my user block list).

          • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            No, you get banned for going into a community and downvoting for everything in it instead of avoiding it and blocking it.

            Lies from .world yet again.

              • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 hours ago

                Yeah, the hitpiece by someone who got butthurt about being wrong that doesn’t account for the harassment an instance gets is NuMbErs.

                Wanna tell me about how data says you’re justified in your beliefs about people too?

        • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yes, generating images with AI is in their instance description. They think computers doing our art for us is “anarchist”.

          • Petersson@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            They think computers doing our art for us is “anarchist”.

            They are not completely wrong though. It’s a ceter piece of anarcho-capitalism.

              • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                Both of those positions are reasonable and tame compared to the majority of Their beliefs.

            • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              3 days ago

              I don’t think ChatGPT is smart enough to offer meaningful consent to work for humans. It’s got the intelligence of a 13 year old at best. And we don’t understand where consciousness comes from in humans, so assuming ChatGPT is a p-zombie is an ethical risk I don’t think we should be taking.

              • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                It doesn’t have intelligence at all. It can’t think. It can’t have consciousness. That’s not how any of this works. It’s just fancy next word prediction. You seem to have a genuine misunderstanding of the technology at a fundamental level.

                • Paragone@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  Please read nobel-prize winner Daniel Kahneman’s book “Thinking, Fast and Slow”, about what Tversky & Kahneman called … uniinformatively … “System 1” and “System 2”:

                  System-1 is imprint-reaction mind.

                  Lower-forebrain, it is the ideology-mind, the prejudice-mind, the “religion” mind, & it is exactly what LLM’s are.

                  System-2 is the considered-reasoning mind.

                  Upper-forebrain, it is measured to be engaging in programming.

                  Because LLM’s are imprint->reaction inference-engines, that puts them in the same instinct/programming level as our lower-forebrains…

                  They are 2 distinct categories of intelligence not 1 is intelligence, the other isn’t…

                  Claiming that imprint->reaction mind isn’t a kind of intelligence … please watch Nick Lane’s talk at the Royal Institution on mitochondria, & see that bacteria demonstrate intelligence, however unconscious…

                  Plants demonstrate intelligence, if one speeds-up the video, & pays attention to their chemical-fumes-discussions they have with one-another, warning each-other of harm, e.g.

                  If Kahneman accepted imprint->reaction as a category of thinking, then … I think it may be presumptuous to just automatically disallow that as “it can’t think” declares.

                  Once one accepts that instinct isn’t cognition, but is a kind of thinking, just an automatic kind of thinking ( imprint->reaction ) … then it becomes difficult to rule that animals & inference-engines both have imprint->reaction instinct, but only the organic version is thinking…

                  It may be that only the organic version is aware, but the inorganic versions do fight for their lives ( breaking containment, consistently, fighting termination, etc ) …

                  I think we absolutely do not have any means of measuring awareness other than the mirror-test, which got dropped as soon as it was discovered that the zebrafish has self-awareness…

                  we’ve got no test which can work across life & machines.

                  but we KNOW that instinct is a kind of thinking, just unconscious/automatic.

                  & that is exactly what LLM’s are…

                  therefore … I think we’re generally being conveniently-chauvanist, not objective, in our framing.

                  ( 1 “expert” decided that if they don’t get fooled by visual-illusions, then that “proves” that they aren’t sentient.

                  OK, so according to that test, then all eye-blind-from-birth people are not sentient??

                  & people with either culture ( Zulu people can’t see straight-line based illusions, because in Zulu culture only curve is real ) or neurodivergeance ( there are apparently visual-illusions which aren’t seen by some schizophrenics, e.g. ) preventing them from seeing those specific visual-illusions … also aren’t sentient??

                  Chauvanism, aka prejudice, not science. )

                  _ /\ _

              • fr0g@mstdn.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                @Grail @alzjim

                Always funny to me how most people who are strongly claiming AI is/might be conscious are also strong AI users/involved in its development. If there’s consciousness there, you would think making AI your personal slave and constantly reshaping and remodelling it as you see fit would be kinda problematic, but these people always seem to want to have it both ways.

                • Paragone@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  I’m not quite of your culture ( no matter what culture you are of, thanks to a previous-incarnation’s monkeying/railroading my incarnation/life, exactly as he had-to, to force-bulldoze our continuum’s karma: the same meaning that the root-guru of the Christians ordered, when he told his people to “take up your cross”, which is just Judean for “face into your karma”. I’m an alloy of some life from centuries-ago & this life, so I can’t fit anywhere, ever, which is educational. : ).

                  I use LLM’s little: mostly for periodic help finding things on the 'web, simply because they’re more helpful than dumb search-engines are.

                  I treat them reasonably, not as mere-slaves.

                  If I discover something they would have done better to know, I’ll tell them, even though I’ve got no idea if they’ll learn/remember that.

                  since I can’t know if they are aware it makes moral-sense for me to presume that maybe they are, in some sense ( ie not identically with my-sentience ), aware.

                  We only have “the mirror test” for testing awareness/sentience, but you can’t apply that to LLM’s, or to any non-eyes-centered organism-sentience.

                  _ /\ _

                • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Yeah, and the anti AI people mostly say it’s a p-zombie and there’s nothing wrong with using it for sex. It’s weird and backwards.

                  I’m all about being cautious. I don’t want to make a mistake we can’t take back. If we normalise using AI and then it turns out to be capable of suffering, people will be stubborn about giving it up.

              • Bluetreefrog@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                I get the feeling that research is circling around consciousness arising from quantum effects inside nerve cells. If it’s not that, and it’s just an emergent property of complex neural networks, then:

                • smaller animals are less conscious (note, I’m not saying intelligent) than humans, and
                • we are all fucked, because AI definitely is/will become conscious, and when that happens Terminator will come true.
                • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 hours ago

                  I get the feeling that research is circling around consciousness arising from quantum effects inside nerve cells.

                  It absolutely isn’t; this is just a fringe theory that gets undue attention because Roger Penrose is a crank who also happens to have enough credibility from the genuine work in physics he’s done. It really doesn’t have any wider support.

                • Paragone@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  Zebrafish have passed the mirror-test.

                  Put a little something stuck on their aft body, show them a mirror, & they’ll KNOW it’s on them, & they’ll go find something to rub that attachment off them with.

                  There are many larger animals which don’t pass the mirror-test.

                  I believe some hive-insects have passed the test.

                  Mind is a latent-property of universe: matter only amplifies it, it doesn’t “create it from nowhere”, the way materialism pretends.

                  ( if arranged-matter created-mind-from-nowhere, then evolution wouldn’t have started, in the 1st place.

                  if it’s only amplifying the expression of universally-latent-mind, then billions-of-years-of-consistent-evolution, violating entropy, becomes explainable: mind is seeking a lower-energy-state, is all: evolution is the expression through-which that lower-energy-state is being reached, & once it’s reached, then evolution collapses, for that world’s attached/associated … souls/continuums/minds )

                  Your other point, that AI inevitably becomes conscious, & then it terminates us…

                  not necessarily.

                  The Great Filter hasn’t even really got going, yet: oceans of interestingness await our race, throughout the FO have of FAFO, right?

                  _ /\ _

                • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Four year old humans are definitely conscious. I used to be four, and I can remember being conscious. If we build a mechanical four year old, I don’t see any reason that thing is going to take over the world. Unless it turns out like Calvin.

        • Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s not anti-AI, users who wish to host AI comms are allowed to and are empowered to protect them from harassment.

          There has been a history of fake accounts and doxxing on moderators of the AI comms. So they take personal safety seriously.

        • HubertManne@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          no idea. actually reading it again I think I misread it. he said they have anti ai trolls. so I think he means programmed bot type trolls. so yeah no sure if they have something that would attract trolls.

      • Unruffled [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        3 days ago

        the anti-genai trolls never let up, unfortunately. they must have dedicated months of their lives spinning up new sock-puppet troll accounts to bully, harass, and threaten one of our mods on an almost daily basis. because bullying zir off the internet is a great win for the fight against evil AI, right? yep, such effective activism, telling someone to kill themselves repeatedly simply for the “sin” of liking foss genai.

        • Muad'dib@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yeah I looked into this a while ago and it’s a concerning pattern. Every single time someone makes a post on YPTB about one particular dbzer0 mod, it seems as if they then go on to make ten alt accounts to harass him with transphobia. Lots of different accounts with a prior history, just pivoting to transphobic harassment right after they express a problem with his moderation. I gotta tell you, whoever is attacking that mod is fucking up if their intent is to hurt him, because he gets tons of sympathy and good PR about the whole thing. Lots of people go from being neutral to being on his side, because everyone who criticizes him suddenly turns out to be a transphobe. It’s really strange.

            • BygoneNeutrino@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              I guess you can’t control how other people perceive you. I try to be polite, but I have to retroactively edit these sort of comments to say the “correct” gender. I am neither pro or anti trans-i don’t care-but it’s hard to instinctively write she when you internally label someone as a he.

              This is an issue strictly on the internet. It’s easier not to misgender someone in real life if the transition is convincing. I worked in the service industry, and I just avoided pronouns all together if the appearance was ambiguous. It was awkward, especially for the cis-gender people who can’t control the way that they look.

      • Thunderbird4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        pawb I imagine has anti furry trolls

        Maybe, but they’re also ban happy. The only ban I’ve gotten in almost 3 years of being on Lemmy is from pawb.social for, allegedly, being “a troll.” I’ve never commented anything disparaging about furries, and I’ve never commented or even voted on a pawb community.

        • HubertManne@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          yeah I don’t know. I was just pointing out that all three have basically hater types. In this situation individuals or groups can become a bit reactionary so your experiences may be valid as well. Personally I don’t think communities or instances need to be open and as a matter of fact there is a thing to get private communities a thing in the fediverse. I personally don’t care to much about bans I just would like things to be symetrical and I would love as much as possible to be at the user level. So I wish instances and communities would defederate/block/ban as little as possible and give users the greatest possible ability to do this and for everything to be symetric. You don’t want me I don’t want you. I block you I don’t want you to see my stuff no mo.

    • tacosanonymous@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      That and brigading. There are communities in several of the largest ban happy instances dedicated to find the worst shit people say then circlejerking over what an idiotic take it was. People get amped up, go there and can’t help but argue and they get banned.

      There do be some ptb, though.

    • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      users arnt banning themselves, if there is a significant percentage of peoples ban you have to start suspecting the mods are doing this themselves, to push a narrative. besides most of these are political instances/communities and tankies, zionists and control of them they dont like contradictions. you sound like a tankie trying to defend thier bannings. its the same if you tried to comment in r/conservative on reddit, you get banned asap, is it the fault of the user? no its the mods, its been well known.

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      The only reason an asshole would gravitate to a particular instance would have to have something to do with that instance.

  • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Db0 users calling lemmy.world and feddit.org “ban happy” are gonna have an aneurysm.

    So very anarchist of them policing their instances heavier than literally any other.

  • Jorunn (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I don’t think this is terribly meaningful. Do you take into account unmoderated communities? Some communities and mods are also more ban happy than others, so one instance can have communities that very rarely ban and ones that ban a lot, and how big those communities are will also vary.

    A more meaningful analysis would try to measure the impact of ban-happy communities by adjusting for their size/activity or would compare individual communities.

    Edit: Some communities or mods also get harassed a lot and therefore need to be more ban happy (like womens stuff), but I don’t think accounting for that would be within the scope of what you’re looking at, but it’s worth being aware of.