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
When someone says, "certain topics will get you banned" that doesn't make me judge the platform, that makes me judge the person.

People are going to assume it's something you don't want to name, if you won't name it.

>>hinkle+ew
Why would you judge the person because some kid somewhere is a trigger happy moderator?

What happened to thinking for yourself?

>>source+6x
> What happened to thinking for yourself?

What do you think I'm doing, right now?

Someone is invoking censorship as a reason not to adopt a new platform. No specifics, just rabble rousing. That's manipulation. Pushing back is thinking for yourself.

Or, they are being imprecise and undermining their position, in which case what I said works as advice on further conversations. Either way is thinking.

>>hinkle+ky
Or they're assuming good faith in their opponents. To not know what has been censored on twitter, and that the recent interest in mastodon was a reaction to the lifting of some of that censorship, is either to be playing stupid or to actually not have the background to discuss the subject usefully.

>>pessim+sI
We weren't talking about twitter. We were talking about one Mastodon server defederating another for hate speech. That's not 'some topics'. That's hate speech.

If they're talking about some other kind of speech that I might actually care about, they should have mentioned it. Because the next bad one I can think of is even worse than hate speech.