A shocking amount of people really needs to learn that a lot of bans/defederations/whatever are not handed out for specific directly-observable behaviour, but for the offender's active refusal to reflect or reconsider when approached about it.
This is true for defederations on fedi, but it is very much also true for community management more broadly.
Most moderators do not act impulsively. If someone got banned somewhere, and they're telling you that "all they did is <innocent sounding thing>", then the reality is that *they are probably lying*, and there was actually a whole conversation (or multiple) where they were asked to stop doing the thing and they trivialized it or actively refused.
That doesn't mean that every moderation action is always justified. But it *does* mean that if you want to question the legitimacy of a moderation action, you actually need to do the work of understanding the full context and not just go off whatever the banned person claims (nor just what's in the public logs).
@joepie91 Had exactly the "All I did was X" thing recently. Was a situation where I was directly there and knew all the details of what happened but because we weren't at liberty to say everything for privacy reasons, the banned party immediately got online and started telling a wack ass version of the story where they just did one tiny thing and they can't believe that's ban worthy, what a horrible injustice was done, woe is them!
It's exactly what I expect from the banned party but I hate how the tiniest but of motivated reasoning has others siding with the most blatantly obvious lies.
