I settled on lemmy.world, but yeah 90% of the lemmy related discussion I see is “Why doesn’t this work like Reddit and when can I expect it to work like Reddit?”

I’ve tried to do my part in explaining this isn’t meant to be Reddit, but I’m already seeing an increase in hostility directed at devs for the lack of central authority (which is the thing they’re fleeing in the first place but fuck me for pointing that out lol.)

I recently moved here and through my minimal interaction so far, I love it. I’m all about positive treatment and inclusion. I have only made two posts (as a somewhat personal experiment to test the waters) which would not have had any attention on Reddit, and people actually talked and congratulated me, which was a very weird but welcome experience.

And I love that the downvote arrow is removed in order to promote discussion rather than just vote and move on.

A service can always improve and get better in some ways, but the stance of beehaw is perfect imo

Like I never even thought about that aspect and honestly I don’t care as long as I’m not funding violence and hatred. And if that were the case I’d leave. It makes no sense to tell someone how to run their instance. It’s theirs.

Yeah, I don’t even understand what they strive to achieve with a fork.

Okay, it’s forked now… do we add… features that the lemmy devs wouldn’t… like…

…???

Absolutely - and I think there’s huge benefit in beehaw being that example, especially as we see big migrations onto lemmy and the wider fediverse.

After finding out about these issues i considered leaving Lemmy. Then thought about how the Beehaw peeps handle things and honestly, i’d rather be on Beehaw than pretty much anywhere else on Lemmy, they’re precisely the people you want moderating your new home.

Yeah lemmygrad will fade in popularity and lemmy.ml has already gotten so big it’s shifted politically. It also seems like the creators are fine with other ideas on their instance too. Maybe it’s just cause they know lemmy wouldnt get adopted otherwise but the only strict moderating against speech I see is against the obvious trolls and alt right fascists so far.

Then you have beehaw and the other instances outright blocking lemmygrad and things seem just peachy

If there was a more feature rich fork but the og is still really active, will you be able to communicate across forks?

Personally I have a very poor opinion of tankies, but that doesn’t really affect how I use Lemmy…unless all the good instances are taken over by them. I find the obsession with effectively random people who don’t actually have that much influence over individual instance moderation a purity obsession.

I didn’t even know what a tankie was before today.

I follow some people elsewhere who are mostly hyping up kbin because the main developer of Lemmy is a tankie and the main developer of kbin maybe isn’t - but it’s such a weird thing to apply a purity test to. Other comments mentioned it but Lemmy is FOSS

Actually Kbin is FLOSS too: https://github.com/ernestwisniewski/kbin

So as I run out of energy: I think you start thinking about some broad stances, or people here will start thinking of them for you. That “we do not know what the political leanings of most of our users are” may be a dangerous sign that there isn’t really a pulse on the kind of community you’re building, and are accidentally just throwing together a place where people gather.

well, the we don’t know here should mostly be understood as a very literal and very to the point statement of facts. we have 10,000 users when two weeks ago we had 700. we haven’t run a survey and most of the people here are new. we’re working on a survey to kind of get an idea of basic demographics; as far as what kind of community we want from a moderator side of this we already have a bunch of mods on the same page about what we want and how we want to do it. we are very aware of all the headaches that community building involves. this is stuff we’ve spent a year thinking about on here (and probably at least another year before the community was created) and now we get to put what we thought into practice and see how it goes.

Just took a stroll over by hexbear to see what you’re talking about. To be honest, I really don’t see those folks being pro-state communism. They are pretty clearly just anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist, and very much see them as being much more anarcho communism aligned than anything.

Is there widespread claims of them talking hate speech other than removed about liberals? Hexbear seems annoying in the sense that they are extremely sarcastic and bitter. Then again, I’m a syndicalist myself, so I do agree with a lot of their points, but just hate that kind of /r/completanarchy style of board where it’s clear everyone has a mix of major depression, anger, and trust issues, and everyone goes around enabling eachother.

As for the rest of your post, I don’t think a message board needs to have a political ideology per se - in fact, I think it’s better to not have one. The admin team itself should disagree with one another to an extent imo. Specific communities might work with one cohesive set of ideology, but the instance itself should just have general rules imo, especially since a lot of instances seem to focus mainly on general topics. Anti-hatespeech rules in general cover a lot of ground in keeping conversation genuine.

The pulse of communities is not agreement, it’s discussion. It’s not kindness that’s needed, it’s good faith. Telling a TERF or a Nazi to fuck off isn’t kind, but oh well it’s warranted as they don’t post in good faith. I don’t think the admins need to do anything more than that.

And if people start to assume mass political bias, oh well, they can start their own instance

Hot (maybe not?) take that I suspect may be in line with your thinking here: Acknowledging a community’s political trends and Striving to build a community that includes people that may not align with the majority trends do not have to be mutually exclusive.

“Beehaw” as in the institution that maintains the community may not necessarily seek to brand itself as politically affiliated, but “Beehaw” as in the word and spirit of the law of the land will inevitably appeal to a particular audience, just as any community’s policies would whether intentionally or not, and “Beehaw” as in the people that make up the community are going to have political leanings within it—that’s just the plain and simple nature of people having opinions they bring along with them.

I can’t speak for @Gaywallet nor Beehaw leadership at large, but @alyaza slipped right in as I was about to say: it wouldn’t surprise me if “we do not know what the political leanings of most of our users are” is less speaking literally and more along the lines of “we’d rather allow the lay user describe their political leaning than we prescribe a political leaning on them.” I suppose a census is in order when the dust settles a bit more 🤓.

–

Trends and Leanings aside, I think the most important role leadership can take here is to make sure this is a space that not only allows the lay user community to define itself, but allows users to also go against that grain. I suspect we’re making progress toward Door #2 rather than #1. It’s absolutely worth emphasizing that kind of conversation remains important, however. Not necessarily as something that’s prescriptive like guidelines, but at minimum as a conversation the likes of “This is what the community typically seems to value, this is what it typically seems to protest. This is what seems to average out as its strengths, and these are its blindspots. What are we doing right, and how might we better ourselves to help make A More Perfect Community?”

I think you’re right to point out that a community is always the sum of its parts. Voices will surface within the community and voice themselves. Part of managing a community is making sure that none of these voices end up drowning out or censoring the voices of others. We have a very different style of moderating here, and we encourage the community to have lots of discussions with itself as a means of moderation.

The main point of your post seems to be that you’re arguing that we must tackle certain issues because they are so pervasive in our society. I would ask you this… why? There are spaces on the internet which cater to hyperspecific niches. For example, I might create a space where I only allow people to post pictures of their cats. The cat pictures can’t have any edited text on top of them and it’s impossible to leave comments. Is this a political stance? Must this place somehow still become a space to debate politics? I think it’s fairly easy to recognize that no, this is simply just a space for people to share pictures of their cats.

The scope of this website and community is admittedly much larger than this hypothetical cat picture spot, but it doesn’t matter how big the scope is. We can choose what we focus on and what we allow. We could ban all politics, but we didn’t feel that was necessary. Will the sum of all voices in our political spaces be representative of our community? On some level, yes, but if on average orange cats are most posted in the hypothetical cat community does that signal a superiority for orange cats or a leaning towards orange cats? No, some people post black cats too, and that’s representative of the space we’re looking to have here. Yes, you’re right to point out that human speech is more complex than pictures absent text and we need to be wary of political leanings creating an echo chamber or explicitly discouraging other voices but I’ve already addressed this and similar issues a few times in my other philosophy posts (this is a long discussion to have and a worthy one, but this is not the space for that right now).

We aren’t taking a stance on which cat is superior because we are wholly uninterested in doing so. We are interested in having a space absent on hate speech, so that’s what we don’t allow. It just so happens that hate speech overlaps to some degree with nearly all political ideologies and this post was about clarifying that point.

This is what I have failed to understand about people seemingly worried about this instance wanting to be a safe space. If they do not like it, they can just jump to another instance.

Or they repeat themselves because that’s all they know what to say. Parroting because they read/heard something that, in their small world view, they agree with and don’t take the time to research.

The other reply made an excellent point. But, I want to add, that sometimes the goal of a debate is just to frustrate you. That’s it. What they’re trying to say may be stupid, nonsensical, needlessly brash, or whatever. That’s intentional. They do not want a sensible discussion, they simply want to piss you off. That’s their win.

There’s a great quote about this, that is (thankfully) often repeated. Let me find it…

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.” ― Jean-Paul Sartre

I sincerely believe this but then again I would not want to use any tools developed by nazi freak at the same time. Huge difference, I know. Just saying that the CCP definitely has major human rights issues and lemmy dev seems to be in favor of them…

I don’t think forking is the right option either. It’s just that we should be aware of that. That’s all…for now.

The platform is a tool, a tool that we can use for free and for good.

And it’s open source as well so we can make sure that biases that the person may have programmed into it (intentionally or not*) can be found and removed.

The more I’ve learned about FOSS over the years the more I love it. And learning about the new stuff behind federated sites is pretty cool.

• Programming biases are a really interesting thing to study, especially unintentional programming biases which happens all of the time.

There are links to donate to the developer right at the bottom of every page on beehaw. If that doesn’t show explicit support, I don’t know what does.

From my perspective, I would say that Beehaw has somewhat of a leftward inclination, but overall, the only real official stance Beehaw has is to focus on being nice and cultivating a welcoming community that is also safe for minorities, which is really the moderation standard applied to everyone regardless of affiliation.

For me, it’s fair enough if people have conflicting views and/or express their views in ways one might consider abrasive. I have no interest in policing people’s tone. When they violate the main intention of this community and harm others, on the other hand, then it becomes important to do something about it, and I think Beehaw does a good job of applying that standard.

The biggest thing though is that the users play a pivotal role in how this culture and community manifest, and it’s really to their credit if others find this place a welcoming place to be(e). It’s just made better if admins are people we can trust to support that.

In any case, I hope you enjoy your time here. 🐝

I think socialism is a very broad subject and most people agree that some sort of group care is important in both politics and personal community life. Though, I agree with you that this subject, like many other political labels, often gets overrun by extremists. Maybe we just need a bigger dictionary to prevent inherit bias or enforce a more apolitical and centrist point of view for online discussions.