4 ms·

Neat, but the big test for a discussion platform like this is what happens when they get big enough to matter, to get the attention of journalists looking for a

Neat, but the big test for a discussion platform like this is what happens when they get big enough to matter, to get the attention of journalists looking for a scoop. It's easy to slide by with haphazard (or no) moderation when you're small. Discussion extremists (trolls, bigots, and the like) are less attracted to smaller platforms; they'd prefer bigger ones, if any would take them. I'm curious what will happen with the central listing of communities if a particularly vile community gains popularity. If there's a community unapologetically dedicated to, say, neo-nazism, and they like to do things like praise Hitler or discuss ways they can kill racial minorities, do they still get listed? How will others feel about that?

justAnotherNET 6y ago
The solution is protocols. How do you feel about illegal content hosted via BitTorrent? Will bittorrent stand for “giving a platform” to illegal content? For the technically inclined: exactly.
newacct583 6y ago
Yeah, exactly. I immediately knew when I saw "federated" in the title that my job was to drop this link in. This comment seems like the right spot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti... Lacking global moderation, eventually every one of those subreddits will end up in Lemmy. Also somethingawful/4chan/8chan style "asshole feedback loops". Everyone at HN likes to claim they want free speech and hate moderation, but in fact moderation is the foundation of our discourse.
- taylorlunt 6y ago
  I want subreddit-specific moderation. That way I can sub to a hatepost sub if I want and a mature tech sub if I want and get the best of both worlds. Everyone here who disagrees is just saying, "I don't want to join those communities, so they shouldn't even be allowed to exist."
  - smabie 6y ago
    What I've learned from talking to people is that though people say they support freedom (specifically, freedom of speech) almost no actually does. Almost everyone wants to restrict what other people say, even if they're never going to hear it or see it. People want to destroy everything in the world they don't agree with, including discourse itself. This isn't a new trend of course, but I personally find it sad that the very people who claim to champion freedom and civil liberties are now actively trying to destroy them. I think the diversity of people and their opinions in the world are scary. In the past, you could ignore or were unaware of just how different other people seemed. Now, this diversity is in the forefront, and people are scared shitless. Ultimately, I believe that being exposed to people that disagree with you existentially shakes you and exposes you to the most scary thing imaginable: that nothing is actually true and that nothing matters. After all, if some guy believes everything I don't believe and vice versa, then maybe what I believe is arbitrary, made-up, and confabulated. And if that is the case, maybe none of us know anything at all. Or, as Heidegger would put it, this contradiction of beliefs removes us from being-in-the-world, and replaces it with being-towards-death.
    - luma 6y ago
      The trouble these communities face is when the online words spill out into real world action. I have no conceptual issue with nazis talking online about loving Hitler, but we have learned that these communities tend to become rallying points for those who wish to act upon the ideas being shared. If you created a platform, then later found out that ISIS was using it to coordinate attacks on hospitals around the world, how would you react?
  - jbeam 6y ago
    >That way I can sub to a hatepost sub if I want and a mature tech sub if I want and get the best of both worlds. Is a hatepost sub the best of a world? >Everyone here who disagrees is just saying, "I don't want to join those communities, so they shouldn't even be allowed to exist." There is a huge leap between "I don't want to be a part of a hate platform" and "hate platforms shouldn't be allowed to exist." Look, if a super laissez faire social media platform attracts a huge amount of neo-nazis then I have no interest in spending time on it's alternative vanilla areas. I don't owe anything to websites or decentralized torrent-like systems that harbor these groups. They can decide to win me over or not. My eyeballs on their vanilla shit provides legitimacy to their horrifying shit. That is very different than saying they shouldn't be allowed to exist.
kixiQu 6y ago
why are there so many comments assuming that the point of this project is to facilitate lighter moderation than Reddit has? the code of conduct on the site is pretty clear, actually. now, can you start a federated instance with that kind of content? sure. but just like how none of the normal mastodon servers federate with Gab, no one would have to federate with the cesspool.
- TulliusCicero 6y ago
  I think that sort of technical distinction might be lost in many when there's a news report on how [platform] 'allows' bigots to spread hatred.

justAnotherNET 6y ago

The solution is protocols. How do you feel about illegal content hosted via BitTorrent? Will bittorrent stand for “giving a platform” to illegal content? For the technically inclined: exactly.

newacct583 6y ago

Yeah, exactly. I immediately knew when I saw "federated" in the title that my job was to drop this link in. This comment seems like the right spot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti... Lacking global moderation, eventually every one of those subreddits will end up in Lemmy. Also somethingawful/4chan/8chan style "asshole feedback loops". Everyone at HN likes to claim they want free speech and hate moderation, but in fact moderation is the foundation of our discourse.

taylorlunt 6y ago
I want subreddit-specific moderation. That way I can sub to a hatepost sub if I want and a mature tech sub if I want and get the best of both worlds. Everyone here who disagrees is just saying, "I don't want to join those communities, so they shouldn't even be allowed to exist."
- smabie 6y ago
  What I've learned from talking to people is that though people say they support freedom (specifically, freedom of speech) almost no actually does. Almost everyone wants to restrict what other people say, even if they're never going to hear it or see it. People want to destroy everything in the world they don't agree with, including discourse itself. This isn't a new trend of course, but I personally find it sad that the very people who claim to champion freedom and civil liberties are now actively trying to destroy them. I think the diversity of people and their opinions in the world are scary. In the past, you could ignore or were unaware of just how different other people seemed. Now, this diversity is in the forefront, and people are scared shitless. Ultimately, I believe that being exposed to people that disagree with you existentially shakes you and exposes you to the most scary thing imaginable: that nothing is actually true and that nothing matters. After all, if some guy believes everything I don't believe and vice versa, then maybe what I believe is arbitrary, made-up, and confabulated. And if that is the case, maybe none of us know anything at all. Or, as Heidegger would put it, this contradiction of beliefs removes us from being-in-the-world, and replaces it with being-towards-death.
  - luma 6y ago
    The trouble these communities face is when the online words spill out into real world action. I have no conceptual issue with nazis talking online about loving Hitler, but we have learned that these communities tend to become rallying points for those who wish to act upon the ideas being shared. If you created a platform, then later found out that ISIS was using it to coordinate attacks on hospitals around the world, how would you react?
- jbeam 6y ago
  >That way I can sub to a hatepost sub if I want and a mature tech sub if I want and get the best of both worlds. Is a hatepost sub the best of a world? >Everyone here who disagrees is just saying, "I don't want to join those communities, so they shouldn't even be allowed to exist." There is a huge leap between "I don't want to be a part of a hate platform" and "hate platforms shouldn't be allowed to exist." Look, if a super laissez faire social media platform attracts a huge amount of neo-nazis then I have no interest in spending time on it's alternative vanilla areas. I don't owe anything to websites or decentralized torrent-like systems that harbor these groups. They can decide to win me over or not. My eyeballs on their vanilla shit provides legitimacy to their horrifying shit. That is very different than saying they shouldn't be allowed to exist.

kixiQu 6y ago

why are there so many comments assuming that the point of this project is to facilitate lighter moderation than Reddit has? the code of conduct on the site is pretty clear, actually. now, can you start a federated instance with that kind of content? sure. but just like how none of the normal mastodon servers federate with Gab, no one would have to federate with the cesspool.

TulliusCicero 6y ago
I think that sort of technical distinction might be lost in many when there's a news report on how [platform] 'allows' bigots to spread hatred.