Intro

We would like to address some of the points that have been raised by some of our users (and by one of our communities here on Lemmy.World) on /c/vegan regarding a recent post concerning vegan diets for cats. We understand that the vegan community here on Lemmy.World is rightfully upset with what has happened. In the following paragraphs we will do our best to respond to the major points that we’ve gleaned from the threads linked here.

Links


Actions in question

Admin removing comments discussing vegan cat food in a community they did not moderate.

The comments have been restored.

The comments were removed for violating our instance rule against animal abuse (https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/#11-attacks-on-users). Rooki is a cat owner himself and he was convinced that it was scientific consensus that cats cannot survive on a vegan diet. This originally justified the removal.

Even if one of our admins does not agree with what is posted, unless the content violates instance rules it should not be removed. This was the original justification for action.

Removing some moderators of the vegan community

Removed moderators have been reinstated.

This was in the first place a failure of communication. It should have been clearly communicated towards the moderators why a certain action was taken (instance rules) and that the reversal of that action would not be considered (during the original incident).

The correct way forward in this case would have been an appeal to the admin team, which would have been handled by someone other than the admin initially acting on this.

We generally discuss high impact actions among team before acting on them. This should especially be the case when there is no strong urgency on the act performed. Since this was only a moderator removal and not a ban, this should have been discussed among the team prior to action.

Going forward we have agreed, as a team, to discuss such actions first, to help prevent future conflict

Posting their own opposing comment and elevating its visibility

Moderators’ and admins’ comments are flagged with flare, which is okay and by design on Lemmy. But their comments are not forced above the comments of other users for the purpose of arguing a point.

These comments were not elevated to appear before any other users comments.

In addition, Rooki has since revised his comments to be more subjective and less reactive.


Community Responses

The removed comments presented balanced views on vegan cat food, citing scientific research supporting its feasibility if done properly.

Presenting scientifically backed peer reviewed studies is 100% allowed, and encouraged. While we understand anyone can cherry pick studies, if a individual can find a large amount of evidence for their case, then by all accounts they are (in theory) technically correct.

That being said, using facts to bully others is not in good faith either. For example flooding threads with JSTOR links.

The topic is controversial but not clearly prohibited by site rules.

That is correct, at the time there was no violation of site wide rules.

Rooki’s actions appear to prioritize his personal disagreement over following established moderation guidelines.

Please see the above regarding addressing moderator policy.


Conclusions

Regarding moderator actions

We will not be removing Rooki from his position as moderator, as we believe that this is a disproportionate response for a heat-of-the-moment response.

Everybody makes mistakes, and while we do try and hold the site admin staff to a higher standard, calling for folks resignation from volunteer positions over it would not fair to them. Rooki has given up 100’s of hours of his free time to help both Lemmy.World, FHF and the Fediverse as a whole grown in far reaching ways. You don’t immediately fire your staff when they make a bad judgment call.

While we understand that this may not be good enough for some users, we hope that they can be understanding that everyone, no matter the position, can make mistakes.

We’ve also added a new by-laws section detailing the course of action users should ideally take, when conflict arises. In the event that a user needs to go above the admin team, we’ve provided a secure link to the operations team (who the admin’s report to, ultimately). See https://legal.lemmy.world/bylaws/#12-site-admin-issues-for-community-moderators for details.

TL;DR In the event of an admin action that is deemed unfair or overstepping, moderators can raise this with our operations team for an appeal/review.

Regarding censorship claims

Regarding the alleged censorship, comments were removed without a proper reason. This was out of line, and we will do our best to make sure that this does not happen again. We have updated our legal policy to reflect the new rules in place that bind both our user AND our moderation staff regarding removing comments and content. We WANT users to hold us accountable to the rules we’ve ALL agreed to follow, going forward. If members of the community find any of the rules we’ve set forth unreasonable, we promise to listen and adjust these rules where we can. Our terms of service is very much a living document, as any proper binding governing document should be.

Controversial topics can and should be discussed, as long as they are not causing risk of imminent physical harm. We are firm believers in the hippocratic oath of “do no harm”.

We encourage users to also list pros and cons regarding controversial viewpoints to foster better discussion. Listing the cons of your viewpoint does not mean you are wrong or at fault, just that you are able to look at the issue from another perspective and aware of potential points of criticism.

While we want to allow our users to express themselves on our platform, we also do not want users to spread mis-information that risks causing direct physical harm to another individual, origination or property owned by the before mentioned. To echo the previous statement “do no harm”.

To this end, we have updated our legal page to make this more clear. We already have provisions for attacking groups, threatening individuals and animal harm, this is a logical extension of this to both protect our users and to protect our staff from legal recourse and make it more clear to everyone. We feel this is a very reasonable compromise, and take these additional very seriously.

See Section 8 Misinformation

Sincerely,
FHF / LemmyWorld Operations Team


EDIT: Added org operations contact info

  • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The comments in here are unbelievable. This post was about the systemic moderation issues that lead to the incident, the team’s response to it, and how to deal with such a problems in the future.

    Half the comments: CATS CAN’T EAT VEGAN

    The other half: CATS CAN TOO EAT VEGAN


    There are people here who need to go back to fucking reddit.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The question is at the root of which moderator’s actions are correct. There’s a reactionary bias from tons of Reddit-fugees that came out of vegan bashing and anti-vegan hysteria which we see crop up repeatedly.

      It can be difficult to distinguish between people sincere, abet misguided, beliefs and outright trolls. And moderation takes a significant temporal and emotional toll. “Vegans are killing their pets/kids!!!” is a popular panic phrase intended to gin up hostility. Consequentaly, the mods in these communities are playing endless wack-a-mole with trolls who just want to conflate veganism with an esoteric form of cruelty.

      Establishing a bright line of appropriate content is important for good moderation. But to know where that line is, you need some degree of objection information.

      Which brings us back to the fundamental question of whether safe, reliable vegan cat food exists (spoilers: it’s been around for decades). But if you don’t accept that premise, you’re going to see any mod censorship as some diabolical cat killing agenda.

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Cats are obligate carnivores. It’s trivial to stroll into any store and get food that will make your cat healthy but its not clear how easy it is to get vegan food that will do the same. Seems like if you don’t believe in eating meat you should just not have a little carnivore in your home. For instance rabbits can be trained to live inside, cuddle with you, and poop in a box.

      • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        In the end, vegans are always going to win, because a vegan way of life is one (but not the only) precondition for ways of life that are actually sustainable.

  • rustyfish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Not that I think Rooki was wrong with what they did. But it doesn’t take a genius to figure out how fast such stuff can get out of control.

    Thing happened. Admins reflected on thing. Came up with solution. Communicated solution with community in an understandable and transparent manner. Perfect.

    If that lazy fucks over at Reddit would have been half as good as you with theirs jobs, we probably wouldn’t be here to begin with.

  • ripcord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Wow. I have no involvement in the original issue and I’m definitely not as familiar with the circumstances and details as others. There may be a lot missing here.

    But this feels like a very mature, logical, empathetic, well-intentioned response and the kind of thing I like to see.

  • mechoman444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I think what people generally want is not reddit. The mods in reddit have almost no accountability from admin.

    Oftentimes comments are removed just because a mod doesn’t agree or like the content.

    I was banned from r/Ukraine simply for saying we shouldn’t demonize the entire population of Russia for the actions of their government. I later argued with the mod through their “arbitration process” and he would not unban me. (What really hurt is that I’m Ukrainian. It was an improvement sub for me)

    No one wants that! Please don’t let that happen here!

    • doctortran@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I was banned from /r/grindr for suggesting it’s ok for trans people to use it. It’s legitimately one of the most blatantly, unapologetically terrible mods I’ve ever seen, and it’s just him.

    • nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m personally of the opinion that if a community is poorly moderated, you should just make a new community that is better aligned to the level of moderation users actually want and not to rely on a centralized admin team. They should really just be preventing serious abuse, like grooming, and provide support and advice to mods.

      Ultimately its not sustainable and gives Admins too much centralized power to determine to that level what is and isn’t appropriate mod behavior. I get that what you experienced is generally dickish behavior, but that can easily spin out of control when it relies on admin judgement calls like that.

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        In reality, even admins don’t hold the ultimate power. This is a federated platform and there are lots of other instances. It’s an extension of the sentiment you express - if people don’t like how things are done on one instance, they can move the community, or even start a new instance.

  • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    There could be a technical fix for this. Lemmy could use a system that requires certain moderator and/or admin actions to require a 2-person authorization, and temporarily put the action in an “under review” state for a set amount of time.

    For instance, an admin removing content would replace it with a placeholder for up to 2 days. If another admin accepts the change then the comment is removed. If no other admin responds then the content is put back.

    This is pretty much Change Management.

    • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Upvoting and commenting for visibility, this is a great idea. Though concur with snooggums below that it would need to be an opt-in option.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Personally, I like this idea. But it can be equally abused if two admins colluded to agree with each other. But, I think it’s at least better than nothing.

      I would imagine this would need to be done at the software level to be most effective. You should request this sort of feature from the Lemmy team to integrate into both the backend and the UI.

      If you do create issues for this request, you should post back here (or whatever related community) so people can upvote the issues to show the devs we really want the feature.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Would be fine as an option that could be enabled, especially for larger communities, but an instance run by a single person wouldn’t be able to host communities if it was a built in requirement for all communities.

    • Resonosity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I was just thinking about this: peer review admin actions. A first admin could initiate the action, then the peer review could be assigned randomly to another admin - randomly so that admins can’t create specific cartels to team up on specific topics.

    • Maestro@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You can’t fix people problems with technical solutions. I know tech folk like to think they can, but it really doesn’t work. Sometimes you simple needs some rules, guides, and a good book to slap someone with.

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      A slight modification, it could be implemented as a suggested action where the admins (or mods) can ask for a second opinion when they feel it’s appropriate.

      That way urgent actions can happen right away, and potentially controversial actions can be discussed. It should solve the problem without forcing a specific workflow

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think a 3 person team is better. 1 mod/admit marks something for moderation. 2 other mods need to agree to mod. If 1 of the mods disagrees, it stays.

      This is inspired by true events in September 1983, where a russian command post in charge of their nuclear weapons caught on radar 4 incoming missles, supposedly fired from America. The captain in charge turned his key to fire every nuke they had at America. The second in command turned his key as well. The third in command refused. His logic was if America was going to fire nukes, why fire exactly 4 nukes and only 4 nukes, all targeting the same location? Would it not make sense to deplay thousands if you’re trying for a surprise ambush?

      Those nukes that America fired? Clouds. The Earth was at just the right rotation for 30 minutes to confuse the russian radar into interpreting 4 missle shaped clouds as solid objects.

      America was almost turned to dust for no reason, 2 weeks before I was born. Because of some happy fluffy white clouds, that even Bob Ross will admit almost DID cause an accident!

      So yeah. Maybe we do a 3 mod system.

    • feddylemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Solid idea. One consequence of this would be the possible delay in removing material that really should be removed as fast as possible, though.

      • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Which is why the content would get masked until a 2nd person approves or it gets unmasked.

          • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Change Management can account for that, but if it’s truely that big of a problem then there might be legal or other compelling reasons to keep the content server side and inaccessible.

  • nl4real@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I appreciate you guys owning up to this, especially since a lot of people here seemed determined to ignore the actual issue and just start a redditesque circle jerk about vegans.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      https://www.benevo.com/vegan-cat-food-from-benevo/

      Benevo Cat foods contain all the nutrients an adult cat needs, including a wide range of vitamins (including A, B, D, E, K), essential fatty acids and taurine, without the need for slaughterhouse meat. Although obligate carnivores in the wild, domestic cats still need nutrients they would normally source from prey. Thankfully Benevo Cat contains all those nutrients in a bioavailable kibble.

      Benevo Cat is a professional cat food, created by Benevo in 2005, formulated and checked by independent animal nutritionists to meet the AAFCO(USA) and FEDIAF(Europe) guidelines for animal nutrition.

      We’ve had safe and healthy variants of vegan cat food for 20 years. Trying to elevate the question to animal abuse speaks entirely to personal ignorance.

      • Sunshine (she/her)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Thank you for sharing this. People need to learn more about this topic before they speak like armchair nutrition experts.

      • macrocarpa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Farm feedstock.contain all the nutrients an adult cow needs, including a wide range of vitamins (including A, B, D, E, K), essential fatty acids and taurine, without the need for grass. Although obligate herbivores in the wild, domestic cows still need nutrients they would normally source from vegetation. Thankfully farm feedstock contains all those nutrients in a bioavailable grain.

        grain is a professional cow food, created by grain manufacturers in 50,000BC, formulated and checked by independent animal nutritionists to meet the AAFCO(USA) and FEDIAF(Europe) guidelines for animal nutrition.

        We’ve had safe and healthy variants of cow food for 52,000 years. Trying to elevate the question to animal abuse speaks entirely to personal ignorance.

        Eta - modifying the diet of a domesticated animal for your convenience seems to run contrary to the premise of minimising animal cruelty.

        • improvisedbuttplug@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          You might be surprised at how much corn, grains, and other non-meat stuff there is in cat food. Particularly in cheap dry kibble that nobody typically bats an eye at someone feeding to their cat.

          This conversation just seems so weird to me. The number of people who feed their cats anything similar to what they’d be eating in the wild is minuscule.

          Meat isn’t some magic substance, biological chemical reactions turns grass into cows. That you think you can’t take those nutrients and make them bioavailable to an obligate carnivore is absurd. Ever seen an impossible burger?

          And if you think the cruelty stems from the idea that cats wouldn’t like it, I gotta say. I have my cat on an expensive grain free meat heavy diet. And I know for a fact that he goes crazy for the cheap shitty corn based purina kibble. He has busted into other people’s homes to steal kibble from their cats.

          So is it cruel for me to feed him a more nature based diet when it’s clear he prefers corn based trash?

          I don’t see any reason why a functional vegan cat food couldn’t exist.

      • fross@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Cut and paste blurb from a marketing website from a manufacturer. That you cut and pasted from your top level comment which currently is at -30 due to it’s lack of actual sources or anything of value.

        This is not helpful to anyone and you may be out of your depth if you think it is.

        I am not taking a position on feeding cats vegan food. I am just pointing out you are arguing so weakly you’re actually doing your position a disservice.

      • redisdead@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        “Our vegan cat food is totally safe and normal”, says the vegan cat food manufacturers.

        You have to be a vegan to believe that bullshit lmao

        • Sunshine (she/her)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          17 hours ago

          “Our vegan cat food is totally safe and normal”, says the vegan cat food manufacturers.

          You’re making the genetic fallacy. If you dont believe the source then read the reports from the independent animal nutritionists mentioned above.

        • rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          So, by your logic, shouldn’t there be a bunch of malnourished and dying cats as a result of people buying this food and only letting their cats subsist on it?

          Where are the outraged customers? Where are the lawsuits?

          • redisdead@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            People who are dumb enough to spend extra money on vegan food for their carnivorous pets aren’t usually smart enough to realize it was the problem.

            And as for the few that eventually figure it out, they’re smart enough to realize saying “I fed my carnivorous pets a vegan diet” does not reflect well on them.

              • redisdead@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                My evidence is vegans of Lemmy going up in arms against moderation because they deleted content about feeding a carnivorous animals a vegan diet.

                • rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  That isn’t evidence that the aforementioned cat food will cause cats to become malnourished. That’s just you speculating to confirm your existing biases.

      • rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I appreciate your comments here, even if the people you’re trying to educate completely ignore you and downvote you because they have no response to the fact that vegan cat food exists.

        I’m not vegan, but the hysterical ignorance espoused in this comment section is bewildering.

      • Danitos@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Your argument is very weak, you are just citing a company that sells vegan food for animals, a very clear conflict of interest.

        For instance, I can also cite some Google PR page on how much they care about privacy.

    • Pieresqi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      And humans weren’t made to eat tablets and get injected with mixtures from syringes.

      IDK it seems like pretty clear human abuse to me

      If medical drugs can be made to be safe and compatible with humans there’s nothing stopping it for the same happening for vegan food for cats

        • fatalicus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          No, people are down voting it for being a bad argument, because humans can in fact make the choice not to take those tablets or get those injections.

          But these cats that are forced a vegan diet can’t.

          Oh sure, they could choose to not eat, and die a bit faster than they would on the vegan food, but no animal will choose to ignore food when they are hungry.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            humans can in fact make the choice not to take those tablets or get those injections

            My infant child has less agency over what he eats than my pet dog. They both get vaccinated over vocal objection.

            Humans do not, in fact, get to make these choices. Other, older, wiser humans routinely make these decisions on their behalf.

          • Pieresqi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Cats don’t get to have a choice in a lot of things.

            I fail to see how food would be the bad compared to sterilization, breeding, medical injections, outings and other things infringing on their autonomy.

            Oh well…

  • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    To be clear, while the idea that discussion is welcome is good the moderators of c/vegan do not tolerate discussion. Any opinion that goes against the orthodoxy of the echo bunker leads to a permanent ban. If you express any opinion other that, “It’s fully acceptable to force your extremist philosophy on an obligate carnivore by feeding it an unnatural vegan diet” you will be banned. It’s an incredibly closed minded and intolerant community.

    • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      There probably just sick of every thread, every damn thread, having people coming in and trying to debate. It’s not a community for that and asking people to not do that is well within their rights. If somebody went into an anime community and kept saying live action is better, they should get banned. Doesn’t mean that community is an echo chamber.

      • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        What you’re describing is an echo bunker. The anime example isn’t a good fit, though. In the case of c/vegan they are taking about animal abuse, feeding an animal that evolved to eat meat and that needs to eat meat to be healthy a vegan diet. Whether anime or live action is better doesn’t harm anything. Feeding a cat a vegan diet has a real possibility of causing health problems or death.

        No one gives a shit what they want to eat. I look at the pictures of the brown slop that they post claiming its the best recipe ever and laugh. I don’t care. When they talk about doing that to a cat or dog I care. Those are the posts that get a lot of reaction from people who love animals.

        The hate that vegans get on Lemmy is when they push themselves into discussions of farming, hunting, fishing, etc. to push their ideological purity on other and to shame people who are just going about their lives or when the talk about abusing their pets.

        • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          they are talking about animal abuse

          they push themselves into discussions of farming, hunting, fishing

          So when vegans talk about abuse it deserves moderation but when non-vegans talk about killing, maiming, and eating animals that’s totally cool, not abuse, and above reproach? One should have outsiders come in the the community to give their opinions but the other shouldn’t? Come on, you’re not really that bad at making a point, are you?

          • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Your question is loaded with a sense of absolute moral superiority. I raise chickens for eggs and meat. I don’t abuse them or maim them. I treat them well, feed them high quality food, and provide clean, dry, warm housing that protects them from predators. The roam freely during the day and come home to roost at night. When it is time for them to die they die in the most humane way possible.

            What vegans are talking about is pure, selfish arrogance. They’re going to take a carnivore and force it to eat an inappropriate diet to satisy their own selfish needs. Get a herbivore instead. Get a rabbit. They are cat like and the thrive on a vegan diet.

            • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              If you treat your chickens so well and feel so good about it, why did you put your killing them in the passive voice like it’s something that just happens? Just say you chop their heads off or whatever. Don’t hide it.

              “Vegans are arrogant and abusive but let me tell you why I’m allowed to kill animals and am above reproach.” Come on, you kettle, it’s clearly not arrogance you have a problem with.

    • Fern@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Forgive me for being suspicious of your comment. There is a huge anti-vegan bias in society, and many argue against veganism, not in good faith. Can you provide any examples of the mods doing this?

      • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Sure…this discussion came up a couple of months ago. Several people argued that feeding a herbivorous diet to a carnivore was animal abuse. Everyone arguing that point, including myself, was banned and all comments not supporting the group think in the echo bunker were removed.

        Need more?

        • Fern@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          More would be great. What sort of arguments did you make? We’re you discussing the science?

  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    All I’m getting from this entire saga is that vegans on here are lunatics. From forcing this nonsense on pets, to all of the follow-up, this is a very bad look for the community, from somone looking in from the outside.

    This is some cultish behavior…

  • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Feeding a carnivore a vegan diet indeed is animal abuse. Cats can survive, but survival and healthy are not the same. Cats on a vegan diet get sick much faster and die younger, statistically according to vets. I’m a vegan, I have cats, I feed them meat. If you don’t like feeding your pets meat, get a herbivore pet instead.

    The way things were handled may have been wrong, but animal abuse should be banned from Lemmy imo.

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I consider it animal abuse, but I can understand that there’s an argument that it’s not. I think the distinction of requiring scientific evidence supporting their claim is a reasonable requisite to allow the discussion.

      It seems like things worked out here. My knee-jerk reaction would be to classify vegan diets in carnivor pets to be animal abuse and probably would have reported. But discussion happened to allow for discourse, and they rolled back the decision to at least allow for transparency.

      And to be clear, I still think it is hands down animal abuse and hope that others come to the same conclusion. Animals don’t have the ability to make an informed choice. Subjecting them to a dangerous diet to satisfy your own niche moral compass is evil.

      It’s not about you, it’s about the animal. Get over yourself.

      But again, I think it’s OK to have the discussion, and I hope the community buries their side into oblivion.

      • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I agree with you. I think it’s OK to discuss how animals are abused by their owner but it’s not ok to discuss whether or not you should abuse your animal because of your personal believes.

        Talking about it makes people aware. Like most people are not aware about the animal abuse behind animal products, why the industry is immortal. When you don’t know any better, why would you change your diet. Having civil discussions are necessary to spread awareness so society can change to be better.

        Sadly many terror vegans (the social justice warrior vegans active on internet who lack communication skills and are comparable to evangelical brain washers) are unable to keep discussions civil. They claim a monopoly on the truth and attack and shame anyone who isn’t as vegan as they are. They are the face of vegans as they are the ones constantly taking a stage. They give vegans a bad reputation and it only convinces people to oppose veganism. So I’m not surprised how shit hit the fan in the vegan sub. But yet again, this shit gives vegans a bad reputation.

        These terror vegans are so extremely good in reaching the exact opposite of what they intend.

  • blazeknave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Animal abuse isn’t an opinion. It’s evil. And malice by ignorance that could be corrected is malice.

    Stop apologizing for doing your jobs. We all have opinions and raise them loudly in the Fediverse so I understand your natural reaction and want to communicate well. But IMHO this is troll feeding. If they posted in favor of human genocide, you’d close a ticket, and move on, not write an apology for taking it down.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      https://www.benevo.com/vegan-cat-food-from-benevo/

      Benevo Cat foods contain all the nutrients an adult cat needs, including a wide range of vitamins (including A, B, D, E, K), essential fatty acids and taurine, without the need for slaughterhouse meat. Although obligate carnivores in the wild, domestic cats still need nutrients they would normally source from prey. Thankfully Benevo Cat contains all those nutrients in a bioavailable kibble.

      Benevo Cat is a professional cat food, created by Benevo in 2005, formulated and checked by independent animal nutritionists to meet the AAFCO(USA) and FEDIAF(Europe) guidelines for animal nutrition.

      We’ve had safe and healthy variants of vegan cat food for 20 years. Trying to elevate the question to animal abuse speaks entirely to personal ignorance.

      • Soup@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s still forcing YOUR diet on a helpless animal. They eat meat.

        End of story.