It’s so grating how the lesson of #fediblock and such still hasn’t been learned/intuited by a majority of furry fandom yet. Everyone’s so quick to jump on the soapbox and complain about ineffectiveness of applying broad-sweeping blocklists when they’re negatively impacted by it, and try to speak in a noble manner of morals and principles. Yet, typically in barely a few posts/days later, are still defending much of it as a necessity to ‘solve the Nazi problem’, when it does absolutely nothing of the sort. Blocking “Nazis” (whereas that term is used in such a broad spectrum from: actual non-sockpuppet neo-Nazis, to ‘people I disagree with’, that it makes it meaningless) does not make them disappear, it’s no more than the logic of a child hiding under their bedsheets hoping for the imagined monster to go away.
If you look back into history of the fediverse, even back before ActivityPub became a thing (back in OStatus days): it’s a pattern where a lot of the heavily blocked instances ended up continuing to live on, while the over-moderated instances killed themselves off by crippling their user’s ability to intercommunicate per overprotective moderation. In fact, in the present day it’s where a lot of the ‘most active’ fediverse instances are the most blocked, and yet fediblock puts very little of any dent in it. You know what happens when you list an instance in a fediblock list? You irrevocably start to put them in the “banned” side of the fediverse, the space where people don’t have to walk on eggshells nor try to soften their words to appease the sensitivities of the more overmoderated instances.
On the “banned” side, there’s no point to try to cater to the fediblock crowd anymore, because that’s already been irrevocably severed. If you’re listed once, it’s just blindly recirculated to other lists, and never resolvable. So instead of “keeping the Nazis out”, whereas the practices of fediblock–you’re actually pushing more people to ‘that side’ of the internet, and causing the opposite of whatever ‘social justice’ endeavor you’re on. I’ve actually made far more genuine and authentic friends from fedi than I have from Discord and Telegram by far, majority of friends which are on the ‘banned’ side, versus being around the people that’ll ditch out from you at the moment of getting any ‘cancel culture’ labeling.
I almost feel bad for these people that wrap themselves so deep into such fleeting, fickle online associations (usually also chasing after parasocial relationships too). Always so quick to startle, offend, or whatever. The ever-moving ‘chase’ of jumping from Twitter, to fedi, to Bluesky just to ‘not literally be in a Nazi bar’, like some neverending Scooby-Doo monster chase scene. What is so staggering and harmful in witnessing word choices you disagree with? You can just shrug it off, ignore, and move about your day. It’s no surprise that anxiety disorders are so profoundly ubiquitous in the present, if people can’t de-condition themselves from going panic mode in stumbling across something they weren’t expecting. But yet people believe it’s a responsibility to hide any level of provoking content, as if it’s “protecting” them, instead of realizing it grows their phobias.
A fediverse server is not a private Discord guild, it is not a Telegram group, it’s to be handled as internet infrastructure like an email server, a backbone router, etc–you don’t interfere with legitimate traffic just because you disagree with differing viewpoints or lexicon, otherwise you greatly reduce the effectiveness of the network and just push people back to centralized services. If you want a moderated community then start a centralized forum, a chat server, or any other variety of closed-space communities.
If you routinely have problems being a center of negative attention, then: stop virtue signaling, stop acting as ‘internet tough guy’, stop doing ‘callout’ posts to provoke drama, stop openly virtuing every block you make, stop trying to make anything mundane to be political, and you will start to be virtually invisible to these people. This isn’t even just exclusive to posting online, some of it applies to in-person interaction as well. Generally only the miserable prefer to be around the miserable, and usually it’s the most miserable people that exhibit most of the aforementioned behaviors. Stop trying to act as some different personality online, and instead talk how you genuinely would in-person.
Self-reflect. Sometimes you may have character flaws that you can improve on; don’t fall into the bait of “feel good” content, or the narcissistic “you’re absolutely perfect the way you are, don’t change a thing”, else you stunt yourself from self-improvement.
@arcanicanis What I observed is that many fediblock evangelists use proprietary social media monopolists to get a sense of "public marketplace", arguing polemically about politics, economy, culture and follow edgy people over there, but on Fedi they insist that this is their "feel good" social media feed and should be universally sterile to contrast their awful feed on the other platform.
As for myself Fedi is the only social media I use and yes, I want it to be universal and open
#FediBlockMeta
The best "feel good" platform is one where people can express themselves without worrying about some nervous nellie taking offense and deplatforming them.
If people are offended by something, they need to mute it and move on. This process will make them stronger as individuals.
Humanity needs to get past this illusion that we can all get along. It has done nothing but create conflict.
@amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
"Humanity needs to get past this illusion that we can all get along. It has done nothing but create conflict."
when you say this and I know your bigger concepts on how we should live, it doesn't line up with a free speech fedi. it does line up with a fedi where the norm is freeform harassment and ultimately the people you don't want to live near you don't use it, and the conversation is all negative towards those groups. your views reign.
More free speech does not result in any one viewpoint winning out.
The people out there who do not want to see the stuff you object to will mute it.
Like we do with shills, spammers, idiots, retards, the insane, etc. already.
@amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
no, most will just not use it. you will pervert/kill this place. same with your concept that forced exile of people unlike yourself from the US and Europe will finally give everybody peace and prosperity. it's ridiculous selfish propaganda.
Not true at all. Most people are going to resopnd to them the same way people responded to you when you tried to grief @p in the memoriam thread for his canine.
We sigh, mute, and move on.
> when you tried to grief @p in the memoriam thread for his canine.
I can understand if he wants to argue with me, but that seemed like probably the worst place for him to do it, and he doesn't even want to talk anything out: every time I talk to him, he's just posturing in the form of senseless demands.
@p @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
do you allow spam on your server?
> do you allow spam on your server?
The thing you keep claiming FSE allowed was the thing that resulted in the first ban, and probably the majority of bans that happened here for quite some time. Harassment was covered under spam. I am frustrated that you repeatedly made the accusation. Aside from things that are illegal, indiscriminate spam was the other thing that could result in a ban without warning.
What is "allowed" is a moot point now, though, because it's all being replaced, which I announced very loudly a very long time ago.
@p @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
did you answer the question? less text please. do you allow spam?
> did you answer the question?
I have now, but I had not when you typed that. I do notifications in chronological order, you should know that.
> less text please.
I can't, I gotta condition.
@p @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
I'm still confused.
you don't allow spam. you consider such things as tagging people with "die slur" to be spam so don't allow that either. yet you refused to explain that to me because i didn't ask correctly and was rude even though you know what I meant and it's not explained in the stuff I could find on your site and links you sent. and you go on about how moderation is bad and you're building a system where it will be impossible...
> yet you refused to explain that to me
I explained it repeatedly and you ignored it every time.
> and you go on about how moderation is bad
Depending on what you mean by moderation, this makes no sense. I say "no opinions are censored" and I mean exactly that and you don't listen.
> building a system where it will be impossible...
Building a system under which no one will be able to censor another person? Yes, obviously. No one will be able to decide on anyone else's behalf what they can post, who they can talk to, or who they can listen to.
The printing press was heavily opposed by the Catholic Church: you control history if propagating text relies on having an army of scribes. Hand-wringing from bishops about how, with a printing press, *anyone* could just print *any* kind of heresy ("misinformation" from their perspective) and propagate it all over. What I am building is much more modest than the printing press, but I do not understand why "completely uncensorable" could conceivably be a bad thing to anyone but a statist.
@p @amerika @wjmaggos @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
Police will post illegal porn on it then arrest everyone else on it
@p @amerika @wjmaggos @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
Deleting or removing uploaded data is censorship
In a 100% uncensorable system it is impossible to prevent data from being uploaded & 100% impossible to remove uploaded data
All data is stored on a device
Police would upload illegal data to the storage device that could not be blocked or deleted
Police would prosecute the owner of the storage device & the owner could not delete nor block the data to prevent prosecution
