I agree with this. There will still end up being a good chunk of moderator discretion, but maybe we can come up with some checks for that? Something that distributes the decision making power beyond just one mod.
Comrade_Spood
joined 1 week ago
Except games with shitty anti-cheat like Battlefield. Those are just unplayable.
This sounds like something someone who would turn on trans people would say
I think either is a great way of balancing user safety and experience, while still allowing for individual freedom
I would agree with you if .ml was run by less authoritarian styled socialists. However I have not found that to be the case. I have found them to be basically just as bad as liberals, and the really bad ones can be just as bad as fascists. Our only common ground is the destruction of the current capitalist system, however that is often times where the similarities end.
Their fanatic support for authoritarian dictatorships, denial of genocides, and open hostility to those that don't follow their beliefs (including towards anarchists) does not make me view them as friends or allies. Those that have not met me with open hostility because I am an anarchist tend to treat me more as a tool to further their own agenda rather than a comrade. That is not a dynamic I wish to be a part of. MLs do not tend to treat us anarchists as equals, instead they tend to treat us as open enemies, tools, or they infantilize us.
As much as I hate the tankie triad and would love to defederate them, I think leaving it up to the users is the beat course of action. However I do believe we should take steps to protect users who join the instance. Possibly providing a warning page about the tankie instances, why they are problematic, why we chose not to defederate, and how users can go about blocking the instances themselves.
However if we can't or won't take those actions to give users the information to protect themselves, I think defederation is the next best option.
I do not believe we ahould remain federated unless we have some form of protection for the instance as well as our users.
Side note: Just want to come in and also say hi to everyone as I have just joined. I've been using the fediverse for a couple years now and just recently swapped from Lemmy (my main instance being slrpnk) to piefed, due to my issues with the lemmy devs. I started on piefed.blahaj.zone as I am familiar with the Lemmy version, but decided to give quokk.au a chance as I prefer anarchist oriented instance (and unfortunately the only other one I have found on piefed is run by the db0 admins who I have issue with as well).
I just don't understand anyone's logic here. I feel like you can defend someone's right to be somewhere because of their historical ties to a region, but I don't think you can use it to deny someone else's right to also live their cooperatively. That has been my understanding of decolonization. Its not about kicking all the colonial settlers out, but about removing the inequality and hierarchy when it comes to management of the land and living there.
However notice how I am also not pulling genetics into this. I am using historical ties. Just because you are 8% jewish or palestinian shouldn't mean you are entitled to anything. But if you can say your mother, grandmother, whatever lived there for however long then I feel like there is an argument. But that person could be armenian, manchurian, french, swahili, whatever. To me its about your own personal ties to the land, not your ethnicity. Blood doesnt mean shit.