zlacker

[parent] [thread] 90 comments
1. redox9+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:03:00
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.

replies(13): >>golerg+p >>ceejay+t >>Saris+v >>hinkle+L >>sleepy+M >>bigbil+W >>nkozyr+21 >>reaper+c1 >>mastod+g1 >>echelo+p2 >>mejari+d4 >>pessim+Ja >>papito+Xv
2. golerg+p[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:05:03
>>redox9+(OP)
Can I read more about this? What topics are banned?
replies(1): >>LeoPan+j1
3. ceejay+t[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:05:13
>>redox9+(OP)
“On Mastodon” is like saying “in restaurants”. There’s a wide variety of instances to various tastes.
replies(1): >>jug+81
4. Saris+v[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:05:37
>>redox9+(OP)
You can hang out on an instance with like minded people, everyone else might defederate you but you'll have your space.
5. hinkle+L[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:06:51
>>redox9+(OP)
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.

replies(4): >>source+D1 >>screye+Y1 >>redox9+i3 >>echelo+n3
6. sleepy+M[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:07:07
>>redox9+(OP)
That is.. quite opposite from the experience I have had. I have discussed a fair amount of topics, it was civil, and things were fine.

Though, the only time when I did see that happen, was when someone was transphobic, homophobic, racist and such.

replies(1): >>SV_Bub+n1
7. bigbil+W[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:08:16
>>redox9+(OP)
What kind of topics would those be?
replies(1): >>kstrau+Xe
8. nkozyr+21[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:08:54
>>redox9+(OP)
> I prefer Twitter in the sense that it's more laissez faire in terms of what kinds of speech get you banned.

I really don't think it is. It's still largely political, and subject to the whim of the reader.

The guy who tracked and reported on Twitter Blue subscriptions was suspended today.

You always have to kiss someone's ring.

◧◩
9. jug+81[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:09:40
>>ceejay+t
Yes, but the point being made is that you then choose a more welcoming instance and then it's defederated instead because it allowed your post, so then your Mastodon experience sucks anyway and you only gave yourself an illusion of freedom.

I'm not sure how common this issue is but I _can_ say that I've been through a defederation bullshit myself because the large instance did something as egregious as welcoming people regardless alignment to Swedish government party (i.e. any party with over 4% of votes in Sweden). That was far too much for some instances like mastodon.art to handle. The admin got fed up since he had neither will nor moderation resources of that kind and shut down the instance, so everyone had to migrate which is a headache by its own even if supported.

From other stories, I swear the greatest threat to the Fediverse is politics and more or less childish cross-instance strife. I just now checked my Mastodon feed and this very fucking issue was discussed once more so I guess some drama has went down again while I was away. There's been trouble of this kind on Lemmy too already.

People say "it's like e-mail". Yeah, if we have like 20 major e-mail servers in the world and there's drama across them as we bet on the winners via Patreon.

replies(1): >>VWWHFS+H1
10. reaper+c1[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:09:54
>>redox9+(OP)
> On ~~Mastodon~~ Twitter simply discussing certain topics will get you banned.

Also true.

replies(1): >>redox9+r2
11. mastod+g1[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:10:19
>>redox9+(OP)
Which instance? Sounds like you joined a niche instance of a few hundred people. I find twitter to be extremely restrictive, you can’t have open discussions, you either get banned or get piled on by abusive blue check accounts.
◧◩
12. LeoPan+j1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:11:04
>>golerg+p
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.

replies(3): >>meepmo+G1 >>golerg+s2 >>mardif+jd
◧◩
13. SV_Bub+n1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:11:47
>>sleepy+M
>Though, the only time when I did see that happen, was when someone was transphobic, homophobic, racist and such

“I mean, when all the wrong and bad people are kicked out everything is great!”

No one is complaining about people with Ford vs Chevy comments being banned. It’s the controversial things that need to be refuted, not hidden.

What makes you so absolutely certain you are on the “right side” of any opinion? Because the people in charge of these services are censoring the other side?

How long before you find yourself with “the wrong thoughts”?

replies(2): >>burtne+Tb >>kstrau+Ke
◧◩
14. source+D1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:13:31
>>hinkle+L
Why would you judge the person because some kid somewhere is a trigger happy moderator?

What happened to thinking for yourself?

replies(1): >>hinkle+R2
◧◩◪
15. meepmo+G1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:14:02
>>LeoPan+j1
Some people confuse the freedom of speech with the right to be listened to.
◧◩◪
16. VWWHFS+H1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:14:04
>>jug+81
Maybe you can make you own instance and then you can have all the swedish government parties you want
replies(1): >>jug+n2
◧◩
17. screye+Y1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:15:25
>>hinkle+L
Come on, in a lot coastal discourse it is practically taboo to mention vanilla opinions that are held by 70+% of the population.

Mastodon instances are largely moderated by people from the other 30%. You are free to judge if you want. But don't pretend this is a violation of publicly accepted morals in the 1st world.

replies(7): >>antifr+53 >>guelo+d3 >>ESMirr+l3 >>bigbil+44 >>therea+Q4 >>chasin+g6 >>SSLy+Xk
◧◩◪◨
18. jug+n2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:17:48
>>VWWHFS+H1
And then I get defederated for having done so. Did you even read my post? It's an illusion freedom that does not exist in practice because this is Mastodon we're talking about.
replies(5): >>VWWHFS+e3 >>vidarh+l5 >>alpaca+q7 >>rsynno+so >>andrek+rp
19. echelo+p2[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:18:02
>>redox9+(OP)
> On Mastodon simply discussing certain topics will get you banned, and instances that don't ban those users get defederated.

This is why P2P is superior. Federation nodes can be used to strong-arm collective behavior against the will of individual users.

I don't mind being exposed to liberal and conservative thought. I want to consume almost the entire spectrum of human discourse so that I can synthesize ideas for myself and understand more effectively. As long as the signal is reasonably high.

Reddit and fediverse moderators wield absolute power over their fiefdoms. They're intellectual dictatorships. (Not to mention egotistical behaviors some of them have.)

P2P allows the end user to consume what they want, weight discussions how they want, and participate in any number of emergent clusters. It's the real path forward.

replies(2): >>misnom+U3 >>kstrau+8f
◧◩
20. redox9+r2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:18:07
>>reaper+c1
Yes, that's why I said its more permissive, not that Twitter is fully permissive.
◧◩◪
21. golerg+s2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:18:14
>>LeoPan+j1
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?

replies(2): >>vidarh+M5 >>ploum+67
◧◩◪
22. hinkle+R2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:20:49
>>source+D1
> 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.

replies(1): >>pessim+Zc
◧◩◪
23. antifr+53[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:22:14
>>screye+Y1
I am having trouble imagining what you mean. Can you illustrate your point with an example opinion that is held by 70% of the population but is taboo to discuss?
replies(2): >>ploum+G5 >>murder+R7
◧◩◪
24. guelo+d3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:22:51
>>screye+Y1
"coastal" is ridiculous. American vs American hate is out of control.
replies(1): >>moreli+q4
◧◩◪◨⬒
25. VWWHFS+e3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:23:01
>>jug+n2
that's because nobody wants to hear what the people on your instance has to say. you think they should be forced to?
replies(1): >>jug+GA7
◧◩
26. redox9+i3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:23:30
>>hinkle+L
When you name something, then it becomes a flamewar about that something.

But generally speaking, anything that the US/"San Francisco" left wing ideology deems "bad" is generally unwelcome.

◧◩◪
27. ESMirr+l3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:23:40
>>screye+Y1
It’s amusing you’re perfectly illustrating the OPs point. “Vanilla opinions” is so vague as to be completely meaningless.
◧◩
28. echelo+n3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:23:58
>>hinkle+L
I'm LGBT and my spouse is trans. I don't believe you should silence anti-trans rhetoric. I believe you should engage it.

The ability for /r/conservative to ban my counter arguments is just as harmful as Mastodon shutting down the anti-trans positions.

Conversation is what moves us forward and is how we find commonality.

I grew up religious and conservative. I changed a lot of my viewpoints through friendly conversations in the internet of 2000-2010, before tumblrism, cancel culture, and censorship took hold.

If I grew up in today's world or internet, I might never have been exposed to different opinions in a non-hostile, no-judgment environment. By trying to segregate, censor, and ban we're only leading to intractable polarization. Never giving folks an opportunity to change. Never accepting that people are capable of growth.

Please let's talk with each other. Even if we disagree. You'd be surprised how effective that can be.

We're all suffering though this world together. Laugh away our differences and find the ways and the things that we share. We all hold more in common than you might think.

Love your enemy, even if they don't love you (yet).

If I could have one lasting impact on this world, it would be this message.

replies(5): >>egyptu+25 >>ktm5j+75 >>krapp+S6 >>ohgodp+m8 >>guilyi+VF4
◧◩
29. misnom+U3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:28:53
>>echelo+p2
Then just make your own instance?

Or is the complaint that you don’t have the power to force yourself on people who don’t want to read your shit?

replies(2): >>kelvin+0c >>pessim+Xd
◧◩◪
30. bigbil+44[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:29:40
>>screye+Y1
> vanilla opinions that are held by 70+% of the population.

Name three.

31. mejari+d4[view] [source] 2023-07-01 21:30:20
>>redox9+(OP)
>I prefer Twitter in the sense that it's more laissez faire in terms of what kinds of speech get you banned.

Musk literally just said that the term 'cis' is a slur that will get you banned.

◧◩◪◨
32. moreli+q4[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:32:01
>>guelo+d3
Americans used to literally own other Americans, while committing genocide against other Americans.
replies(1): >>pessim+bc
◧◩◪
33. therea+Q4[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:34:02
>>screye+Y1
> vanilla opinions

Like what?

◧◩◪
34. egyptu+25[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:35:04
>>echelo+n3
I'm a fifty-something trans lady and I am just fucking tired of trying to change viewpoints. I just want to live my life and talk with my friends without some butthead coming in and telling me I shouldn't exist, I get enough of that by checking the news lately.

If you have the energy to politely engage people who think of you as a child molester who should be shot on sight, great! Go for it! But I have done that, and I am tired, and I do not want to do it any more. I run a Mastodon and I just want it to be a space to talk to my friends and maybe make some new ones, and thus, I block the fuck out of places I do not expect to get anything but hate from.

replies(1): >>hinkle+h6
◧◩◪
35. ktm5j+75[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:35:21
>>echelo+n3
As a trans woman living in a conservative area, I get where you're coming from but I seriously disagree. The hardest pill for me to swallow through all of this has been realizing that some people will never change no matter how much you engage them. The only way I maintain my sanity is to do whatever I can to reduce my exposure to that kind of thing so I don't end up engaging with it.. because it just never goes well.

I realize it's a complicated issue, and I'm never a fan of banning speech. But not all speech deserves a response.

◧◩◪◨⬒
36. vidarh+l5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:36:16
>>jug+n2
Free speech is not freedom to force everyone else to listen. You get defederated from those instances who choose not to want to listen to you.

Users on those instances who want to listen to you are free to go to instances that don't defederate you.

replies(1): >>jug+Jy7
◧◩◪◨
37. ploum+G5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:39:26
>>antifr+53
It is funny how, in their own bubble, people assume that their opinion is held by 70% of the population while it is often the opposite (fun fact: more people voter for Hillary Clinton that Trump yet Trump voters believe that they are the majority. Same for abortion where polls showed that a clear majority of the US was pro-choice yet a very loud minority has a lot of political power)
◧◩◪◨
38. vidarh+M5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:39:57
>>golerg+s2
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.
replies(2): >>tinus_+ug >>erik_s+6h
◧◩◪
39. chasin+g6[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:42:52
>>screye+Y1
> vanilla opinions that are held by 70+% of the population.

Ooh, ooh, ooh? Like what kind of "vanilla opinion?"

replies(1): >>mardif+Uc
◧◩◪◨
40. hinkle+h6[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:42:56
>>egyptu+25
Common rhetoric among PoC even twenty years ago was essentially, "We're tired of being spokespeople and tutors for your problems."

Not everyone is cut out to be an educator, and I think you should have the option not to be voluntold for the job. Not just because it should be your right, but because insisting that everyone in a group can speak for that group is itself stereotyping. I think once you see that it's really hard to be patient with people who don't.

◧◩◪
41. krapp+S6[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:46:36
>>echelo+n3
Mastodon isn't shutting down anti-trans positions, specific instances are choosing not to federate with other instances that harbor those positions. Those instances and the homophobes and transphobes are still there.

And you're free to engage the people who want to put you and your spouse on a train car in conversation all you like. Maybe you'll deprogram one or two, but you'll just help spread their propaganda to exponentially more people than you could ever help.

I have no commonality with such people and don't want to find any. I don't want to share a society with them, and I know they don't want to share one with me. I certainly don't want to debate the Jewish Question or "groomers" or race science with them on my gamedev instance.

>We're all suffering though this world together. Laugh away our differences and find the ways and the things that we share.

You know these people want you dead, right? They don't believe you have a right to exist. You and your spouse. Especially your spouse. We're not talking about a difference in belief about tax laws or support for opposing soccer teams here. "Laugh away our differences?" I'm sorry but with all due respect fuck that.

◧◩◪◨
42. ploum+67[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:48:05
>>golerg+s2
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.

replies(1): >>pessim+9e
◧◩◪◨⬒
43. alpaca+q7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:49:46
>>jug+n2
Freedom doesn't mean everyone gets whatever they want.

Your freedom just doesn't override the freedom of others to avoid you. You can't force others to interact with you and there's nothing wrong with that.

replies(1): >>jug+oB7
◧◩◪◨
44. murder+R7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:52:30
>>antifr+53
86% of Americans think that police funding should increase or stay the same: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/02/03/before-re...

80% of Americans think that the southern border should have increased security: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/09/08/republica...

50% of Americans oppose affirmative action (with 33% approving, 16% not sure): https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/06/08/more-america...

replies(3): >>jmopp+Wa >>pessim+xb >>clipsy+iA
◧◩◪
45. ohgodp+m8[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 21:57:14
>>echelo+n3
They're not looking to debate you or find common ground with you. They're looking to eradicate you, or at the very least send you back to the closet.
replies(1): >>pessim+uc
46. pessim+Ja[view] [source] 2023-07-01 22:11:57
>>redox9+(OP)
It's a shitty monoculture mostly filled with a particular demographic (like most new and obscure tech things), the people who program computers, and the people who they meet at parties.

This would disappear with more widespread usage. The problem is the software, not the culture. If the software is improved, or the dead ends are pruned and something else is created that learns the lessons from previous tries, the new cultures will bury the old.

If building software required experts on model trains or K-pop, the culture would suck, too. The goal is to make that a stage rather than an endpoint.

edit: I enjoy model trains, but I do not get into political or social discussions with model train guys.

◧◩◪◨⬒
47. jmopp+Wa[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:13:37
>>murder+R7
None of those are really taboo to discuss: police funding has only increased in recent years, Joe Biden has been quietly upgrading security on the southern border since the start of his term, and the supreme court recently ruled against affirmative action.
replies(1): >>GolfPo+sk
◧◩◪◨⬒
48. pessim+xb[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:17:26
>>murder+R7
Nearly 70% of U.S. adults say transgender athletes should be allowed to compete only on sports teams that correspond with the sexes they were assigned at birth

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/americans-oppose-in...

replies(1): >>moreli+Xc
◧◩◪
49. burtne+Tb[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:19:46
>>SV_Bub+n1
First they came for the Nazis...
replies(1): >>pessim+xd
◧◩◪
50. kelvin+0c[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:20:24
>>misnom+U3
I think that with p2p you don't have to think of servers and still be decentralized like downloading a torrent file, peertube etc
◧◩◪◨⬒
51. pessim+bc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:21:13
>>moreli+q4
That didn't really count, because they all agreed that black people and natives weren't Americans and had no rights they were bound to respect. The real oppression is when relatively wealthy upper-middle class people get criticized.
◧◩◪◨
52. pessim+uc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:23:09
>>ohgodp+m8
That's just monstering your enemy to justify any behavior towards them.
replies(1): >>clipsy+LA
◧◩◪◨
53. mardif+Uc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:26:28
>>chasin+g6
Trans people in sports? Wanting strong borders? Disagreeing with stuff like drag reading sessions?

Not American or white or whatever, just stating the obviously less widely supported stuff that may sound uncontroversial to the more terminally online.

replies(2): >>moreli+1d >>chasin+CDh
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
54. moreli+Xc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:26:45
>>pessim+xb
This is obviously not taboo to discuss since every mainstream media source has been discussing it nonstop with virtually no reference to like, actual data, for over a year.
◧◩◪◨
55. pessim+Zc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:26:49
>>hinkle+R2
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.
replies(1): >>hinkle+w21
◧◩◪◨⬒
56. moreli+1d[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:27:45
>>mardif+Uc
> Disagreeing with stuff like drag reading sessions?

What does this mean? Drag queens shouldn't be allowed to read? Like what concrete policy are you saying they can't propose which isn't obviously overreach?

replies(1): >>mardif+Pk
◧◩◪
57. mardif+jd[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:29:36
>>LeoPan+j1
What would be grotesquely offensive stuff to you? You realize that grotesquely offensive to very online Americans is an extremely niche thing? It makes sense to NOT want your online presence to be tied to whatever some Americans think makes perfect sense, right?

I don't think you'd agree that it would be weird to not want your social media and what you see online to be tied to what some, for example, Saudi dudes think is acceptable at the moment.

replies(1): >>LeoPan+xg
◧◩◪◨
58. pessim+xd[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:31:30
>>burtne+Tb
That's what happened. People started demanding that Nazis be censored on Myspace. I knew people at the time who were under the impression that being a racist was already illegal in some way, and thought that Myspace not immediately banning all of them made the site an accessory to the crime. The worst part was they seemed to be centering it around me because I was the only black person they knew.
◧◩◪
59. pessim+Xd[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:34:48
>>misnom+U3
You've figured it out entirely. Mastodon is run by the kind of people who are willing to put in a bunch of time, effort, and money into dictating the conversation of others. People who enjoy that kind of power.
◧◩◪◨⬒
60. pessim+9e[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:36:57
>>ploum+67
> Mastodon confronts you that if you say shitty stuff, nobody wants to listen to you.

Mastodon isn't a person, you're talking about the guy who runs the instance.

> nobody wants to listen to you.

The person who runs your Mastodon instance is not everybody.

◧◩◪
61. kstrau+Ke[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:42:39
>>SV_Bub+n1
I run a Mastodon instance. You don't have to see eye to eye with me or my users to talk to us. However, I have defederated from instances that host:

* Loli porn

* Extreme neo-Nazi content; I'm talking about swastikas, hardcore racial slurs, and the like

* Targeted bullying and harassment

You want to spark a conversation about the relative merits of Republican fiscal policy, let's chat! You want to say that we should still own slaves, Jews eat babies, or gay people shouldn't exist? Go away. I don't owe you a soapbox.

Disconnecting from a server with despicable content doesn't take away that server's right to speak. It just preserves my -- and my users' -- right not to hear it.

◧◩
62. kstrau+Xe[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:43:56
>>bigbil+W
"Oh, you know."
◧◩
63. kstrau+8f[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:46:09
>>echelo+p2
> I want to consume almost the entire spectrum of human discourse

...said no one who's ever been a moderator.

You find out quickly that there are some perfectly horrid people out there. You absolutely do not want to hear everything that people say. It seems like you would, but you really don't.

◧◩◪◨⬒
64. tinus_+ug[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 22:59:53
>>vidarh+M5
So the alternative to Twitter is Balkanized safe spaces where you only talk to like-minded people.
replies(3): >>LeoPan+Ar >>moreli+b81 >>vidarh+nx2
◧◩◪◨
65. LeoPan+xg[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 23:00:10
>>mardif+jd
I'm not sure what you're complaining about. Don't join the Saudi instances, then? That's kind of the whole point of Mastodon, and federated services in general. There will always be instances that match whatever worldview you may have.

What you can't do, and should never expect other people to do, is to be forced to receive what you're posting, or to put it another way, you can't force people to listen to you.

◧◩◪◨⬒
66. erik_s+6h[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 23:04:24
>>vidarh+M5
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.
replies(2): >>wolfga+Ph >>vidarh+Nx2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
67. wolfga+Ph[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 23:10:59
>>erik_s+6h
Mastodon instances have a section on the About page (under “Moderated servers”) which shows you exactly that. You can even get it programatically: https://docs.joinmastodon.org/methods/instance/#domain_block...
replies(1): >>erik_s+xi
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
68. erik_s+xi[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 23:15:57
>>wolfga+Ph
Thanks, it looks like they fixed some prior complaints about not being able to see this.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
69. GolfPo+sk[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 23:31:42
>>jmopp+Wa
I've noticed than when people on the internet say "I'm not allowed to discuss X", what they actually mean 99% of the time is "I'm not allowed to be an abusive jerk to other participants". (The other 1% of the time, they're posting off-topic in a tightly focused forum.)
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
70. mardif+Pk[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 23:35:22
>>moreli+1d
To be clear it's not personal beliefs that I have, just contentious issues I could think of that are far more controversial irl versus online. Also I think the issue is the reading sessions for kids.
replies(1): >>moreli+Z61
◧◩◪
71. SSLy+Xk[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-01 23:36:18
>>screye+Y1
Coastal? Like, related to beaches, tides, or some kind of environmental impact?
◧◩◪◨⬒
72. rsynno+so[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 00:07:59
>>jug+n2
You can, generally, say whatever you want via Activitypub. However, no individual Mastodon instance is obliged to facilitate this, nor is any particular Mastodon user obliged to listen to you.

Personally, I prefer not to listen to certain peoples’ Important Opinions about how people like me shouldn’t have rights (life is too bloody short), so I use a Mastodon instance which doesn’t tolerate that. People with such opinions are of course entitled to use a Mastodon instance which does (and there are plenty of them). I’m struggling to see an issue here. Person A is free to say whatever old nonsense they like, Person B is free not to listen to it.

I am, by the way, genuinely curious; I just don’t get the issue here. If a person with Important Opinions can’t hassle the rest of us with said opinions because we choose to opt out of them, well, so what?

replies(1): >>jug+Tz7
◧◩◪◨⬒
73. andrek+rp[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 00:16:03
>>jug+n2

  > And then I get defederated for having done so.
if i don't like what someone is saying i have the freedom to disassociate from them, wether its in real-life or in mastodon or whatever

  > It's an illusion freedom that does not exist in practice because this is Mastodon we're talking about.
i think you are confusing freedom with privilege.
replies(1): >>jug+SA7
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
74. LeoPan+Ar[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 00:35:53
>>tinus_+ug
This is a weird way of saying "a platform where you can't force other people to read your posts", yeah.

That's vastly superior to Twitter, which routinely shoves stuff in your timeline from people you do not follow.

replies(1): >>tinus_+i21
75. papito+Xv[view] [source] 2023-07-02 01:12:47
>>redox9+(OP)
May I suggest 8chan? Almost no moderation at all, but make sure you have a gallon of Clorox by your desk because you will want to pour that into your eyes.
◧◩◪◨⬒
76. clipsy+iA[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 02:00:57
>>murder+R7
Don't forget, in 1967 (the year in which Loving v Virginia was decided), interracial marriage had less than 20% popular support: https://news.gallup.com/poll/354638/approval-interracial-mar...
◧◩◪◨⬒
77. clipsy+LA[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 02:07:32
>>pessim+uc
It's an accurate description of right-wing views: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cpac-spe...

And no, there is no such thing as eradicating "transgenderism" without eradicating transgender people anymore than you could eradicate "blackism" without eradicating black people. It is a meaningless distinction invented to provide a paper-thin veneer over what is simply a call for mass murder.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
78. tinus_+i21[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 07:32:59
>>LeoPan+Ar
And that is how you end up in an echo chamber where it looks as if your ideas are the only ideas and everyone obviously agrees with you.
◧◩◪◨⬒
79. hinkle+w21[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 07:34:58
>>pessim+Zc
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.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
80. moreli+Z61[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 08:22:15
>>mardif+Pk
Drag queens reading at libraries is one of those things that's absolutely more controversial online than IRL. Nobody gave a shit until Facebook and Twitter groups whipped it up as a culture war issue, and so far even conservative analysts and judges are like "wtf, this is nothing, you can't ban it" and they've had to shift to broad obscenity bans instead, which do not have popular support.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
81. moreli+b81[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 08:37:52
>>tinus_+ug
Well, and like, the entire rest of the world.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
82. vidarh+nx2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 19:44:21
>>tinus_+ug
If you choose to only talk to like-minded people, that is your right, as it should be. And might well be one of the reasons most people aren't on Twitter, and many who are subscribe to extensive block lists.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
83. vidarh+Nx2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-02 19:47:27
>>erik_s+6h
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.
◧◩◪
84. guilyi+VF4[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-03 14:13:52
>>echelo+n3
I agree with this, I think the only way we'll get answers to the most controversial and divisive issues are for people to discuss them. Especially since many viewpoints being shouted down as "anti-trans" are actually very reasonable and need more discussion.

For example, the fairness and safety issues with regards to males competing in women's sports, or the issues of safety and dignity in women's prisons when males are incarcerated there.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
85. jug+Jy7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-04 09:32:10
>>vidarh+l5
My issue with this is that this kind of instance hopping can easily kill a network. Many who were on my instance that shut down didn't migrate away in time and now they lost all their posts, follows, and followers. Many of those won't bother to come back from that terrible experience. I still see those people in some users' friend lists over there (months later) and if I click on them, Mastodon just breaks with a cryptic error message.

So. With Mastodon instance admins and this kind of drama, making internal strife about politics, gender equality, whatever, between a few persons affect thousands of users and greatly inconvenience them, and running a personal Mastodon instance taking great technical know-how and basically being a bit of a geek, I still consider these major issues with Mastodon as it stands today.

So, yes, I want to "enforce" people to hear me. If they choose to follow me. Because this means all the above problems are solved. The only problem federation solves today seems to be the scaling problem. Everything else is about friction and this kind of trouble and persistent worry. "Which instance do I pick" where it feels like you want to have an interview over a beer with the admin first. This has thus far been the major demotivator from what I've seen as a Mastodon user. I think I'd like it more like a P2P-based social network.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
86. jug+Tz7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-04 09:42:26
>>rsynno+so
> Personally, I prefer not to listen to certain peoples’ Important Opinions

Of course you can avoid hearing this!

You do so by not following said person. Mastodon works just like Twitter or Facebook in this regard.

This is not the problem that I'm talking about at all. I'm talking about the infrastructure problem. It's about instances shutting down, people not having had time to migrate, and thousands of users losing everything (their entire account and content) because some admin decided he didn't like furries enough or let any political party member join his instance, admin is defederated, admin says fuck this.

Sure, I can make my own instance to guarantee my place on the network if I buy a server and run it on that but how many do you guys expect are enough Mastodon enhtusiasts (of all things, haha) to even bother with learning and doing so. It's a stillborn workaround if this problem keeps resurfacing.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
87. jug+GA7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-04 09:49:16
>>VWWHFS+e3
Yes, I think they should be forced to.

Note that this still (of course) requires following said person on said instance. So people won't be spammed by views they disagree with. Mastodon is no different than, say, Facebook there. You still need to explicitly follow people. Mastodon doesn't even have an "algorithm".

But I can't see any positives from being able to defederate like this. What is the main benefit to remove the freedom of your users to follow people?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
88. jug+SA7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-04 09:50:51
>>andrek+rp
> if i don't like what someone is saying i have the freedom to disassociate from them

Yeah, on Mastodon we usually do so by not following that person?

This is not what I'm talking about but the infrastructure issue of internal strife between admins affecting tens of thousands of users for the most ridiculous of reasons, and this has not just been a hypothetical scenario, unfortunately.

And no, setting up your personal instance isn't a realistic solution for most people who just want to chat.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
89. jug+oB7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-04 09:53:27
>>alpaca+q7
> You can't force others to interact with you and there's nothing wrong with that.

On Mastodon, no one is forced to listen to anyone without a follow. You don't have to worry about that. This is not what I'm talking about, but the infrastructure problem.

I've repeated myself a lot already so I refer you to one of my replies to your sibling comments if you still want to discuss this.

◧◩◪◨⬒
90. chasin+CDh[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-06 21:03:15
>>mardif+Uc
Ah, yes, the bigoted ones.
replies(1): >>mardif+eKm
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
91. mardif+eKm[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-07-08 08:53:27
>>chasin+CDh
Sure, but that's besides the point. They can be bigoted and still held by a majority of people.
[go to top]