Is he banning them for disagreeing, or for people calling him a pedo over an autistic semantics discussion?
Mind you, I agree that when you hold controversial opinions about certain topics people are likely to discuss, you shouldn’t be a mod. Then again, if you value your sanity and blood pressure, you shouldn’t want to be a mod anyway - it’s a thankless job.
Huh? The screenshot says they think generated pictures are not abusive. Not the it’s not csam.
That’s a very dangerous way of twisting someone’s words, especially on a subject this emotionally charged.
Edit: adding to add that contrary to the title here, they are not talking about Editing pictures to be nudes, but generating them. Don’t get me wrong, I have no interest in seeing either, and the day they’re paying themselves is not doing them any favours. But someone is clearly out for character assassination here.
Nevermind, it was about altering the photos of a 15 year old girl into nudes. And while it technically/physically may not be child abuse, for the victim it might as well be. That’s indefensible - I’m out.
Situation 1: Person A annoys person B. Person B “mutes” person A. Person A rants at Person B, gets no reply, and moves on.
Situation 2: Person A annoys person B. Person B “blocks” person A. Person A notices Person B has blocked them, logs on to an alt account, and annoys them from there.
One of these methods defuses harassment, the other has a far higher risk of escalating it.
I’m curious about what makes people think the second method would work better.
How would they be more powerful than in the current situation?
If it’s an Ukrainian anti-Russia server, yes. And for that matter, I’d also be against a Russian anti-Ukrainia lemmy server. Are you starting to see the pattern?
No, it’s because the proposal for this new instance stems from the Israel/Palestine conflict - it’s literally the opening sentence. Whether they’re pro one or the other is irrelevant to me.
I am not convinced, but hope to be mistaken.
Peace be with you.
I still think that would effectively imply isolation (at least, moreso than not doing it). What you’re describing to me still has a lot of characteristics of an echo chamber. And by spending time on that instance, in those communities, you’ll be spending less time on “generic” instances and communities. In doing so, those instances will, in turn, also become less diverse and more echo-ey.
Again, I understand your reasoning (except for the corporate censorship, there is none on Lemmy AFAIK), but I do think it’s a step in the wrong direction.
I can’t stop you, or even blame you for wanting this.
But in they long run, I think this kind of voluntary isolation is only going to keep the hatred escalating, or just simmering, at best. I say this with absolutely no stake in either party.
If you think defederating everyone you deem toxic is libertarian, no wonder you think there are no authoritarian instances.
As the other commenter said, the premise is flawed, and the execution is worse.
Doesn’t Tubular mean “reminiscent of the Mike Oldfield track”?
I think it’s more useful to take their points at their own merit, rather than factor in who said it. Who cares if they said they were leaving, or if they torture puppies in their spare time. There’s no need to make it personal - feedback is feedback. IMHO a user shouldn’t have to know about federation or how it works - if lemmy wants widespread adoption, tackling these issues will help.