zlacker

>>ZacnyL+(OP)
Meanwhile, I can see this very Mastadon post with no login just fine.

And the interface is not trying to assault me. It loads quick.

...Seems like a better product than Twitter for a public feed.

>>brucet+1k
On Mastodon simply discussing certain topics will get you banned, and instances that don't ban those users get defederated.

I prefer Twitter in the sense that it's more laissez faire in terms of what kinds of speech get you banned.

>>redox9+tv
Can I read more about this? What topics are banned?

>>golerg+Sv
When they say "banned", they mean "if I say grotesquely offensive things, other people will chose not to listen".

You know, just like in real life.

There are plenty of instances that allow abhorrent content, if that's what you want, but you can't force others to receive it.

>>LeoPan+Mw
In twitter, people can choose not to follow or mute you on individual basis, that's basically what “not listening” means. Banning somebody means preventing other people from listening to them, so it's not the same.

Maybe it works different on Mastodon?

>>golerg+Vx
The fact is that Twitter makes you believe that you are listened to, even if you say shitty stuff.

Mastodon confronts you that if you say shitty stuff, nobody wants to listen to you.

People complaining being banned or being on defederated instances are people other don’t want to listen. They pretend to have a personal opinion while they are only assaulting others.

LGBT is a good example: you cannot have an opinion about it. Those people exist. They have the right to exist. You have the right to not engage in any LGBT activity. But you don’t have the right to talk about a "debate". There’s none. If you do, I you maintain that using "cisgender" should be a banned word, you are simply an asshole and can’t complain that people don’t want to listen to your ramblings. And yes, this will get you banned.