You and I both know it was not your first offense, you’re entitled to your opinion on the rest, but we don’t play with rule 3 - especially when it is blatantly ignored.

Aren’t the logs public? It was the second action on my account, the first being a petty mod removing one comment and not other “worse” one. So yeah no it friggen was, so you did zero leg work before issuing a community ban. Nice job!!!

Also if you’d like to get an alert for why your comment was removed or why you were banned, I’d recommend making a feature request to the Lemmy devs, I agree it’d be nice to get alerted when you did something against the rules and what rule, we post that in the mod log but it unfortunately doesn’t tell the user without them digging into modlogs.

Lots of communities have an automod set up to send a message to users, or you know as part of your mod duties you could provide that disclosure so you can work on bettering your communities that you want to moderate…

Come on dude, this is two months of you defending this person instead of removing the offending troll, they created work, and instead of dealing with it appropriately or doing what was right. You just let them give your communities comment metrics and shadow moderated a bunch of people.

What a strange way to mod… fucking yikes buddy. You had someone clearly coming in to cause shit, so I reported some comments, like the sidebar says to do. And I get my comment moderated and banned. What a mod guys!

What was rule breaking about a comment discussing why someone would be doing something…? It wasn’t even a response to them…. I didn’t insult them, you left all the other users comments in that thread…. And I was adding to the discussion.

The comment was 3 months ago………… and this was the same user as this one which was 2 months between them.

You’ve had multiple rule breaking comments, especially last month.

3 months ago……….

Also, the modlog for every community is and has been public.

What does a public mod do when a user isn’t even informed about moderated comment, why it was moderated or what they can do about it….? If a user isn’t informed they did something wrong, they can’t fix it, and banning someone for their first offense on an account is just fucking wild lmfao.

Context dude as a mod you should be using it, not swinging your fucking dick around moderating comments because someone is intentionally causing a disturbance. Ban the one causing the fucking shit next time. Does it seriously make sense to moderate and ban 100s of users instead of the one ass causing the issues…?

So again, this mod is nuts banning users for no reason. Maybe if you want to ban someone for no reason, leave them a comment, explain what they did wrong… since you know how the fuck can someone fix what they did wrong if they aren’t informed…. You were defending this account for at least 2 months. It was 3 months ago I was banned and this post was a month ago… clearly you should have dealt with the cause of the problem mate… fucking hell

Lmfao, I just found out my app has a mod log and saw one of my comments was removed by this mod. My comment wasn’t even a response to the person, and it was “probably a new form of attention seeking” and they moderated it and banned me from the community….

The mods a nut job apparently.

Lmfao, I just found out my app has a mod log and saw one of my comments was removed by this mod. My comment wasn’t even a response to the person, and it was “probably a new form of attention seeking” and they moderated it.

The mods a nut job apparently.

Huh they’ve been in various brands and stores in Canada for atleast a few years. Surprised it didn’t start down there and make its way up here.

If you had a new battery that had say 500mAh of charge remaining the issue wouldn’t happen. If you had an old battery with 2000mAh of charge remaining it’s very possible the issue happens.

Yeah… no… that’s not the case at all. A larger battery with more capacity that is aged would do the same thing as a brand new battery with the same capacity.

They’re a function of each other and your description is now contradicting itself. Capacity is the end function, without voltage can’t have capacity… you’re claiming otherwise.

A 500mah battery can’t provide the same over voltage as a 2,000, you’re claiming it can, come on dude lmfao. Without capacity, it can’t tap the over voltage needed, so the phone crashes and reboots, until you try the same thing. The phone effectively becomes useless after an hour since it can’t do anything demanding anymore, I never said it was dead….

Current is a part of the calculation to get capacity…. You can’t have capacity without current (A)…… you can have current (A), but it’s useless without voltage, and voltage and current gives us… capacity!!

Because the capacity was diminished…. New batteries didn’t have this issues since they were… well new…and had the capacity.

In a fully charged battery you could run demanding stuff, it’s only when the charge depleted that it became an issue, which is it couldn’t acces the capacity for the extra voltage anymore.

Without capacity, you can’t provide the high current… they’re literally related and go hand in hand………

Again, you’re literally explaining more or less the same thing, in a far less technical way… so sure to a laymen you’re “correct”, but that’s where it ends.

The phone would shutoff because the battery would under volt, it was usually around an hour. So what did you think you were correcting…?

You’re being less specific lmfao.

A battery that lasts 8 hours and is a little slower, or a battery that lasts an hour… huh that’s a pretty easy choice, but yeah it can always be swung to make someone look bad.

So they can talk about the relevant commercialization technical bits (the db) and they can’t talk about the part that’s not…? Uhh… what…?

Is that your argument? Does that make any sense to you…? The part that should be restricted is being talked about freely… and the part that shouldn’t be restricted is…? You’re defending the system that’s backwards. And you want to call me naive and obtuse… okay, defend marketing fluff that you ate up like they were expecting….

Is it? Because the next sentence in the paragraph (and the only sentence missing in the quote) is the overall sound reduction. Which is far more important and far less misleading than saying 12db and 94% quieter.

Its intentionally misleading to deceive people, and than the general public incorrectly defends it, this is you.

The circlejerking and hive mind on Lemmy is shockingly worse than Reddit somehow. Not what I ever expected.

Haven’t multiple governments accepted it as real currency at this point? The arguments are valid, but fall flat when you actually look into each.

Hell diamonds are valuable because of artificial scarcity, so that’s a wrench in every precious metal argument….

It gains value because people want it and people want it because it gains value is both a perfect description of cryptocurrency and scams.

Or gold, or any other precious metal, or any other currency really for that matter….

The hate is for making a pretty obviously false claim about no power loss. Increasing or even decreasing the exhaust length will affect performance. So for them to add 8” and claim there is no loss of power is quite frankly an outright lie. So it’s being called out, and yet people are defending the asinine claim, it’s hilarious and very concerning as well.

People are also focusing on the wrong information, the total db was reduced by a paltry 2db, not 12db like what’s being talked about.

So they provide sound data that is misleading, and make a claim about power and not provide the data. This just reads marketing piece instead of anything on the actual tech.

We agree that the -12dB is what’s important for human hearing … Now, you may agree that the 94% reduction is what counts regarding engineering // fabrication // design.

-2db* and 37%*

Why are you perpetuating the wrong information?

They provided the DB data so your argument for all of those reasons is invalid. They could have easily spent a single sentence providing the CFM data. So no, not a single one of those reasons is valid to omit 6 words.

They made a claim, they didn’t need to mention the power claim, but they did. They should have omitted the claim itself using your logic, instead of the supporting data. The argument is flawed itself.

and we commonly have to accept that a certain presupposed level of knowledge as well as ambiguity is necessary.

Like knowing making a discharge tube longer or shorter affects its aerodynamics….? So we know the claim is false already…? Their ambiguity is meant to mislead people with zero working knowledge of the subject… anyone with any experience will see its flaw immediately.

The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

It’s an insignificant 2db, I don’t know why buddy didn’t provide the relevant information.

The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

It’s an insignificant 2db, I don’t know why buddy didn’t provide the relevant information.

The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

It’s an insignificant 2db, I don’t know why buddy didn’t provide the relevant information.