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
On Mastodon, people can choose to pick an instance that will rarely defederate anyone and follow or mute on an individual basis, or they can choose an instance where moderators will take a firmer line.

>>vidarh+fB
The trouble is how to judge them. Automated censorship of others is invisible unless they announce it or you somehow know what you should have been able to see.

>>erik_s+zM
Mastodon instances tend to have admins who are if anything pretty loud and argumentative about what their mod policies are. If that matters to you, you can easily find instances that make a point of being open about what they block. A whole lot of people don't care about the how or why as long as they're not subjected to content they don't want to see, and that's their choice.