1920
This still baffles me, but I guess it's good for federation?
(i.imgflip.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
1920 points (96.2% liked)
Fediverse
17734 readers
162 users here now
A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.
Fediverse is a portmanteau of "federation" and "universe".
Getting started on Fediverse;
- What is the fediverse?
- Fediverse Platforms
- How to run your own community
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
There is nothing illegal about talking about piracy. Get a grip. This is entirely about taking a moral position, because the server is run by liberals with a clear and obvious political position, as demonstrated by their mass banning of socialists.
They're not just talking about piracy, they're linking to it. There's piracy subs on Reddit too and they're allowed because they are very careful to only talk about it and not link to it, and they're severely gimped because of that. What's great about lemmy is that instances that are on with the risk can do so without having to follow anyone else's rules and users can access it by simply having another account.
Linking to pirate sites is also not illegal. https://1337x.to/ woooooooOOooOOooooo scary! I just broke the lawwwww according to you, get a grip.
I think the media companies have been abusing the DMCA to go after people who link to pirated material. also, I'm starting to suspect world is trying to get funding because they're trying to "clean" the site up in exactly the way banks/VCs require for loans. it's a conservative interpretation of the law, especially the recent rounds that purported to go after human trafficking but actually forced major websites to take down anything remotely objectionable.
Ahh they're trying to sell out. Gross.
Wasn't the admin of .world one of the ones who went into the NDA'd cocksucking meetups with Meta?
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yes
If that's true they're idiots. It's not even fucking necessary. All the social media VCs deliberately take the most neutral stance possible for the LARGEST possible userbases. Did reddit? Did any other social media site do that? Fuck no they didn't. They viewed them as user sources and valuable towards growth. It's literally the opposite of what every VC funded group does.
The cleanup only happens before an IPO. During VC funding companies are always as free as they can possibly be.
yeah, that's the part that confuses me. whatever it is, it's another stupid decision in a series of stupid decisions, and hopefully it just kills the instance.
"Wow, Blockbuster sucks because I have to drive to a physical store. I know, let's open up another brick-and-mortar store that's exactly like Blockbuster minus the name recognition. That'll show 'em!"