I’ve transferred the community to GrainEater and left the mod team, I will now apply for mod again.

Here are some reasons why I want to be mod:

• I’m Chinese, I was born in China, raised in Singapore, studied for a while in Canada, returned to China.
• I like fact checking, but that doesn’t mean I’m always right or the authoritative source on China.
• I have some experience with being a moderator.

Here are some reasons why I might not be suitable for mod:

• I am not a neutral or impartial third party and will never be one, I side with China not just because of my nationality, but also because I believe China is truly developing Marxism or scientific socialism.
• While I like fact checking, I didn’t apply it rigorously to every post/comment in /c/China or on China-related posts/comments on Lemmygrad. There are times when I see questionable statements and let it slide because it’s too troublesome to fact check it properly. Sometimes it’s because the content is posted on websites not accessible in China and I don’t use a VPN (unlike others), and alternative front-ends like Invidious (for YouTube) or those for X/Twitter or Reddit may not be working properly. (News sites are fine because of archive services.)

@[email protected] A community mod can’t appoint an admin as community mod apparently, so I have to ask you to do so yourself.

Why did you bring up morphine, to prove that we should be able to discuss morphine or related substances outside the context of medical use or research?

I’d like to add that such phrases should be backed up with sources and details, and not just as a matter-of-fact statement. Other factual statements like “X substance is legal in Y country” or “X substance is proven scientifically to have Y properties and Z effects” might not be fine depending on the context, like if the statements are used to justify promoting the substance in a person’s comment/post.

I think you meant to write “to” instead of “in” in your last sentence “keep those topics in other forums”, that’s what confused me.

Whatever the situation is regarding drug incarceration in America, it is not contradictory to my anti-promotion stance. My view is that anti-promotion should be encouraged to stop more people from becoming possible victims of substance abuse. As for people that are currently undergoing issues with substance abuse, they should at the minimum not be discriminated against, and if possible be helped into a better situation.

I was considering adding “(for non-medicinal purposes)” to the rule, but people who mention medical purposes have proved to me that this is unnecessary. I’m going to repeat this again, online spaces are not a good place to receive advice on medical prescription from others just because they use it in their culture or country.

Where in the post and my comments have I said to ban these substances? I find it frustrating that people come to me and mention so-and-so substance can have medicinal properties, because I understand this concept, but I’m assuming this type of medicine is prescribed by a certified doctor or therapist, and not by random people on the internet just because they use it in their culture or country.

People have different opinions on each of the listed substances, that’s fine by me. This is an anti-promotion rule that will definitely limit the discussion that people can have about them, including but not limited to:

• advocacy for these substances
• comparing pros and cons, then concluding that they’re a net good
• saying that they have little or no side effects in small doses

it really shouldn’t be controversial to be asked to keep those topics in other forums.

I’m not sure what you mean by this last sentence, are there some words missing?

It has been brought to my attention in the same private channel that some comrades have mentioned them casually in other communities, and I’m not going to wait for it to happen here before making up this new rule. The last rule I came up with was Rule 0 in reaction to someone who thought Taiwan was a country and not part of the People’s Republic of China.

I’d be warning them and then deleting their comments if necessary, not ban them, unless they double down. The ban is for people who come into this post and argue for substance abuse, I should probably make that clear.

It’s only a /c/China community rule, and only when I’m still mod.

Well I was thinking of a larger banner that is above or below the navigation bar that’s at the top of the page, so that it is seen immediately.

As this is news from 2023, I suggest changing the post title from “is paying” to “was paying”, or add a “(2023)” prefix.

Similar news from 2021: Taiwan’s Drought Pits Chip Makers Against Farmers | Archive: https://archive.ph/0YvJE

There’s nothing wrong with being proud of a specific province/city/community, but any differences in human society can be used for reactionary division. Flags can be used for other purposes than as a symbol of national sovereignty, but a flag is also probably the most identifiable symbol of independence or separatist movements precisely because it can be seen as a symbol of national sovereignty. I think the political significance of flags outweigh any other aspects, if any.

At the end of the day, there’s nothing inherently wrong with having regional flags, but I oppose it.

In China, only the Special Administrative Regions (SARs) of Hong Kong and Macau have regional flags. We’re not like the US where each state has their own state flag, and I do not appreciate the idea of each province of China having its own provincial flag. If there could be provincial flags, there could be flags for every city/town/district/village, for every administrative region at each level, and if we want to be extreme, there could be flags for each family and for each individual.

While I am using a slippery slope argument of extreme individualism to oppose provincial flags, you can probably understand why this “individuality” has to stop somewhere.

This is a repost of https://lemmygrad.ml/post/5038926, and I (fact check police) disapprove of videos from this channel. Previous comment in response to question from cross-post to other communities:

I’ve seen someone share a video from this “Top Wonder” channel before, all videos and no text or sources, will not recommend to anyone.

Chinese news article that includes pictures that are related to scenes in the video: http://nmg.news.cn/20240423/c1c752c63a124776b19a04ba6029721f/c.html, it’s about various machinery used to combat desertification. The one you asked about is actually the “Jumang 301” (句芒301):

Old 2021 article on “crosshatching with straw” or “checkerboard barrier” https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202102/05/WS601cb6d0a31024ad0baa781a.html

Chinese article on “checkerboard barrier”: https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1800622874211825823 Video: https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1794140909611479840

Thanks for cross-posting this, so that I could point this out to the original author, which I left as a comment there:

Is that the flag for the “East Turkestan independence movement” in the third panel? As a Chinese I’m asking you to not use the flag of a separatist movement as though it is legitimate, especially when you’re comparing it to Israel and Palestine, where Israel is a genocidal settler state and Palestine is a sovereign state.

Xinjiang (what the separatists claim to be “East Turkestan”) is a part of China, the ETIM flag does not represent the people of Xinjiang and thus should not be used in this context.