8 ms·

I don't understand this mindset at all. It's not so much "I want to be able to say whatever I want", it's "I want everybody to listen to whatever I say". Go pos

by simias 6y ago

I don't understand this mindset at all. It's not so much "I want to be able to say whatever I want", it's "I want everybody to listen to whatever I say". Go post edgy xenophobic stuff in your dedicated online community if you like it so much but stop acting surprised when other communities want nothing to do with you.

dgellow 6y ago
I believe that the issue discussed is more about mods having that control instead of the user itself. Not about the fact that everybody should listen to everything. I understand that the question is: should the mod define who “the community” the community can connect with, or not?
- jack1243star 6y ago
  Exactly. Maybe some heuristics or even deep learning could help retaining control. But then we would succumb once again to the Eldritch Algorithm gods...
- gargron 6y ago
  Very few people actually want to filter through the unadulterated garbage of the internet on their own. What you want to do on social media is like, read the news, talk to friends, or promote your work. You probably don't want to spend every minute of your online presence blocking new spammers, new trolls, death threats, conspiracy theories, and the like, just to make your feed somewhat usable. So you delegate this task to moderators. On a centralized platform like Twitter or Facebook, you don't get to choose moderators. Facebook decides it doesn't belong on its platform? It's gone. You have no recourse. With Mastodon, you get to a) pick a server with policies that you like in the first place b) you can switch to another server if you're unhappy with the original one. Server blocks are just an extension of that function. If a spammer creates a new server under their own control and creates a million accounts to send spam from, do you expect moderators from other servers to just click "block" a million times? No, that's why the bulk option exists. There's no way it couldn't.
numpad0 6y ago
More or less “I’m not going to pay for your freedom with my privileges”. De-federation and Gab blocking are mostly for instance operators and app developers to avoid hosting illegal content and avoid being seen as sympathetic to extremists respectively. What people fear is either could be used as grounds to charge them as child molester or colluding terrorists or to revoke your Apple/Play Store developer accounts for life.
young_unixer 6y ago
The mindset is "I want to choose who I listen to. I don't want the Mastodon instance to decide for me" If you don't like listening to some people, that's fine, don't follow them, block them, whatever, but I won't join an instance where I can't listen to other people because the moderator doesn't like their message.

by simias 6y ago

dgellow 6y ago

I believe that the issue discussed is more about mods having that control instead of the user itself. Not about the fact that everybody should listen to everything. I understand that the question is: should the mod define who “the community” the community can connect with, or not?

jack1243star 6y ago
Exactly. Maybe some heuristics or even deep learning could help retaining control. But then we would succumb once again to the Eldritch Algorithm gods...
gargron 6y ago
Very few people actually want to filter through the unadulterated garbage of the internet on their own. What you want to do on social media is like, read the news, talk to friends, or promote your work. You probably don't want to spend every minute of your online presence blocking new spammers, new trolls, death threats, conspiracy theories, and the like, just to make your feed somewhat usable. So you delegate this task to moderators. On a centralized platform like Twitter or Facebook, you don't get to choose moderators. Facebook decides it doesn't belong on its platform? It's gone. You have no recourse. With Mastodon, you get to a) pick a server with policies that you like in the first place b) you can switch to another server if you're unhappy with the original one. Server blocks are just an extension of that function. If a spammer creates a new server under their own control and creates a million accounts to send spam from, do you expect moderators from other servers to just click "block" a million times? No, that's why the bulk option exists. There's no way it couldn't.

numpad0 6y ago

More or less “I’m not going to pay for your freedom with my privileges”. De-federation and Gab blocking are mostly for instance operators and app developers to avoid hosting illegal content and avoid being seen as sympathetic to extremists respectively. What people fear is either could be used as grounds to charge them as child molester or colluding terrorists or to revoke your Apple/Play Store developer accounts for life.

young_unixer 6y ago

The mindset is "I want to choose who I listen to. I don't want the Mastodon instance to decide for me" If you don't like listening to some people, that's fine, don't follow them, block them, whatever, but I won't join an instance where I can't listen to other people because the moderator doesn't like their message.