• @poVoq
    link
    3
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    deleted by creator

    • @TheConquestOfBed
      link
      62 years ago

      You’re putting personal ideology in front of functionalism. The function that demonstrably draws chill well-meaning people to mastodon and pushes queer people and minorities away from alternatives like pleroma is demonstrably the ability for administrators to perform full-instance blocks. This has already been heavily discussed within the mastodon community for years.

      This is how it went down: a particularly toxic conservative or openly fascist community with nazi dogwhistles in their domain name or site description joins the fediverse (we’ll use kiwifarms as an example). Historically they would do harassment campaigns against queer/minority mastodon users via their own users. But the majority of masto admins went through a giant struggle session over it trying to decide what to do, and the solution they came up with was to defederate from the whole instance and purge anyone who sympathized with them as a weak link in the moderation system. This is how witches.live died, their admin was a racist PoS who migrated to kiwifarms after being found out.

      Toxic communities still managed to do harassment campaigns through their periphery. Since they couldn’t infiltrate core mastodon communities anymore, they began to act through ‘free speech instances’. Usually these instances run on pleroma and per the platform’s ideology don’t defederate from anyone. Free speech instances tend to have lax moderation, or in rare cases will go to bat for their users who harass others based on some self-righteous trash ideology.

      This has been demonstrated repeatedly. The sample size got to be big enough that free speech instances are now defederated on-sight. We still have problems with them, they’ve become strategic and have started using bots and rapidly create accounts on instances that were previously unknown. But the majority of the time there is very little drama on the mastodon side of the fedi. And most people like it that way. They prefer to feel safe and it makes them a lot more talkative.

      • @poVoq
        link
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

        • @TheConquestOfBed
          link
          6
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          The former tend to be free-speech instance aligned even if they’re not themselves. They have a tendency to federate with them. There is also a significant amount of ecchi content in the free-speech half of the fedi. Furries are tolerated on the “blue” side because they’re nice to people and don’t put up with racism, sexism, etc. When you’ve been around it long enough you start to recognize the patterns.

          • @poVoq
            link
            4
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            deleted by creator

            • @TheConquestOfBed
              link
              92 years ago

              I’m not ever going to argue in favor of lolicon. Sorry. Finding it morally wrong is justified and anyone who doesn’t want to see that shit has a right to avoid it and defederate. Changing the language to “shunning” and suggesting that defederating from pro-lolicon instances is somehow racist doesn’t change that. I’ve seen plenty of chinese and japanese language instances in the TL that don’t tolerate that stuff.

              And frankly, I don’t give a shit about furries because they’re not attracted to literal children.

              • @poVoq
                link
                1
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                deleted by creator

                • @TheConquestOfBed
                  link
                  02 years ago

                  Holy shit, you’re literally arguing for child porn. Blocked.

                  • @PP44
                    link
                    12 years ago

                    I don’t think he is. I think he is admitting that what is considered child pornography varies from a community/culture to another. Does that mean that any of those position aren’t inherently dangerous and should not be actively fought against ? Of course not !

                    The question about the moral interactions between culturally distant communities is at the heart of this debate, and I don’t think there is a simple answer. And on that, I think I deeply agree with you when you argue that communities choosing who to federate (or not federate) with is a very good approach that mimics real life.

                    Let’s just keep in mind that this method does not implies that anything that lies outside of a community moral standards should be blocked without a debate. But there are things that should clearly not be up to debate, I do not argue that.

      • @abbenm
        link
        32 years ago

        The function that demonstrably draws chill well-meaning people to mastodon and pushes queer people and minorities away from alternatives like pleroma is demonstrably the ability for administrators to perform full-instance blocks.

        This part threw me off. I agree with basically everything you said, but this sentence made it sound like you were saying the opposite. That is, to me it reads like “federating is bad because it pushes queer people and minorities away from Mastodon” even though that’s the opposite of what you mean.

        Maybe just me.

        Anyway, I think this is 100% right. It’s a good way of circumventing the free speech trolls, whose arguments were 100% in bad faith from day one. So you can pick and choose where you go!

        I think one bad effect is that there are some confused people in the middle, who don’t moderate, who will let their communities get poisoned, and I guess I just wish the effort didn’t have to be on each individual mod, because there will be a lot of gaps that let trolls get through.

        • @TheConquestOfBed
          link
          52 years ago

          That is, to me it reads like “federating is bad because it pushes queer people and minorities away from Mastodon” even though that’s the opposite of what you mean.

          Federating with people who are ideologically opposed to your existence creates a horrific social atmosphere. It makes sense if held in the context of conservative violence against minorities. Federating in itself is an amazing technology that mimics actual real life community structures and I think it is capable of creating far healthier communities than mainstream walled gardens focused on engagement stats.

          I think one bad effect is that there are some confused people in the middle, who don’t moderate, who will let their communities get poisoned, and I guess I just wish the effort didn’t have to be on each individual mod, because there will be a lot of gaps that let trolls get through.

          I think it’s good that it’s necessary. Reddit runs on teams of sociopathic mods. Masto mods are much more chill and actually understand their own communities because everyone in it matters to them. If you can’t put in the work you shouldn’t be responsible for the well being of others and deserve to be defederated.

          • @abbenm
            link
            42 years ago

            I should clarify. I mean to say something like “the option to federate or de-federate.” Federating with the bad guys is bad, and the option to defederate from them is good.

            I think it’s good that it’s necessary. Reddit runs on teams of sociopathic mods. Masto mods are much more chill and

            I think the system of block lists is pretty good. I don’t know if it’s easy to use a block list maintained by other instances, the way you can “subscribe” to adblock lists but I think that’s a good way to handle it, to avoid the big workload, get something that auto-updates, and still have granular moderation.

            • @TheConquestOfBed
              link
              42 years ago

              Mastodon updates their blocklists with recommendations on the #fediblock hashtag. Good admins should be following it.