I’m the super paranoid guy about all of this stuff and this exact same thing occurred to me

Why are there a few different changes to sub and site policy connected with the concept of “misinformation”, but somehow skirting around the type of misinformation which it seems is the most pressing issue by far? I.e. accounts which are devoted to posting misinformation?

Honestly I thought the vegan cat food thing was handled semi ok. But surely that’s not the more pressing thing, to justify big team meetings and huge changes to policy and writing misinformation stuff into the legal side and user agreement.

Right?

I am not convinced that depending on self-reporting of veterinary outcomes from people who are feeding their cat a vegan diet is a reliable way to structure the study

In fact, I would say that purely as a personal and anecdotal conclusion, I believe that the self reporting of an indistinguishable outcome from this study probably means that these vegan diets are harming the cats significantly, if the hidden factor of vegan-diet-feeding guardians underreporting bad outcomes were to be included.

I actually agree in general, but this is like the one time in recent memory I have felt like whole heartedly cheering on the Lemmy.world administration team

If some other instance wants to scoop up the animal abuse demographic now that they are ejected from .world, I think we will all survive

The comments were deleted and the admin was banned from the community as per violating the rules of the community

It’s a bold strategy Cotton

I gave ChatGPT my resumé, and in among a bunch of excellent advice, it told me that I needed more recent engineering experience, and invented a job for me that it added to my resumé, along with some accomplishments at that job. See?, it said. Much better.