freamon

It's the crawler at lemmyverse that's down - https://data.lemmyverse.net/ shows that it hasn't updated in 11 days

Already posted 4 days ago btw: https://lemmy.world/post/16488547

Tragically, this also means that, even after 31 years, I've still never 'get good' enough.

Speaking of wildly inaccurate:

Not sure Lemmy gets to throw stones (it'd probably miss).

Not sure where to post this. Sometimes (in ways that are difficult to replicate), I get a JSON response for a reddthat post in my browser instead of an HTML one. It's happened before on mobile (Chrome) and today also desktop (MS Edge), so I was able to make a screenshot:

I'm assuming it's related to 0.19.4, but maybe others have seen this behaviour before the upgrade. Apologies if you're already aware - I had a quick look for other mentions but didn't find any.

Sorry. Maybe I used the wrong term. I meant to say it's not part of the CommonMark spec (as supported by Lemmy) - like spoilers, there's identifiers that have gained popularity, but they're still not properly official. I did do a quick web-search before I made that comment, which suggested there are some sites that use a single tilde for strikethrough.

I didn't intend any criticism of your post - I was just cheekily using it to have a tangential ding at notions of Fediverse interoperability.

With apologies for being off-topic ...

Lemmy: we're a Fediverse app, so can communicate with lots of other ones!
Also Lemmy: here's some non-standardised Markdown, with no indication that it is Markdown, or which variant of strikethrough we support, and a 'mediaType' of 'text/html'

Oh. Then I'm genuinely sorry. I thought we were both having fun, engaging in a good old-fashioned flame war. Add that to 'incorrect assumptions' pile then, I guess.

It was never a threat to remove your posts. The 'threat', to the extent there ever was one, was to not bother seeking clarification in the event of any ambiguity, and only then if they were reported. As for accusations, I didn't realise it was plural now. I think I said that I interpreted your vote as disapproval of my approach, which still doesn't seem like an unreasonable interpretation.

I've never moderated anything before, certainly not on Reddit. You were saying that I reminded you of someone who complained to Crayola. Now I apparently remind you of someone on Reddit. There's nothing I can do about tenuous connections your brain is making, and this can never be a proper disagreement if you're repeatedly wondering off into fantasy.

I was never offended, which I thought you were clear on before, but apparently not. It would seem like this urge you had to teach others, that you couldn't resist, was so powerful that you willing to overlook any possibility that it wasn't required.

As for the offer of changing moderation style: yes, I'm willing to change. I'm still feeling my way around it. If enough people communicate, through votes or comments, that my approach is wrong, I'll re-assess. Obviously though, someone as perceptive as you will have realised that my earlier offer was just for your stuff.

I try to give anyone who reports something the time of day. Apologies if you don't think I handled that report correctly.

Perhaps I should have just PM'd the comment author, so that you wouldn't have felt the need to get involved.

Cheers. I was familiar with the term from astronomy, but unsure why the author thought that term sounded 'bad'. I was trying to engage in active moderation, seeking clarity rather than just nuking anything because it was reported. I'm assuming from your vote that you'd rather I don't give anyone the benefit of the doubt, so I can do that if you prefer.