6 ms·

> because those instances are banned for obvious and good reasons. What benefit does Mastodon offer over Twitter if you think that censorship is good?

untog 6y ago
Not being owned by a Silicon Valley giant? No advertising? API access that doesn’t get shut off for idiotic reasons? I’m sure there are plenty more.
throwaw4y-plate 6y ago
Not-federating with people you dont like isn't censorship, y'all.
zanny 6y ago
Twitter is ruled by the will of the company and by extensions its shareholders and by extension of that the interests of capital. The Fediverse broadly isn't really ruled, its about who you participate with. It is to the benefit of Mastodon et al that even though the mainstream deplatforms intolerance it doesn't actively prevent them from using the software, just from using their servers of it. Yea, if you want to be in the mainstream Fediverse you need to play by the consensus rules of that space. But its just that, a consensus of server operators, rather than the will of a corporate entity.
- kortilla 6y ago
  I’m not sure mob rule is better than a corporate entity in this regard.
  - zaarn 6y ago
    If you disagree, you can run a server that doesn't follow consensus. The most common outcome is that you'll be blacklisted or atleast silenced by other instances (silenced meaning only people that deliberately follow see your posts). People who agree with you and don't blacklist your instance can talk and interact with you. That is basically as close to proper free speech as you get. I get my corner of the internet, where I will blacklist nazis and racism, you get yours were you don't.
    - CaptArmchair 6y ago
      I'll leave this relevant xkcd comic here: https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
      - Phrodo_00 6y ago
        The difference is it's federated, so the content is available to everyone that wants it it their server.
        zaarn 6y ago
        I mean, that's basically why the comment agrees with what I wrote, I think. You're free to federate with whoever you want and other people are free to federate with you or not. Nobody is forced to listen to what you have to say, it's entirely voluntary. Ie, actual free speech.
        CaptArmchair 6y ago
        Exactly. I've clarified this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24036190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24036190 The operative word is "force" which tends to translate to threatening harm or violence. At which point, one tends to contest the prerogative of dominant authority which is usually a sovereign nation state. Depending on where you live, this prerogative is legitimized through a democratically elected mandate and codified in a constitution. This principle sanctions a state to prosecute private citizens exerting violence against each other over differing opinions, beliefs and so on in front of a court of law (separation of powers!) The 1st amendment is the cornerstone, in that it protects private citizens from that same legitimate authority trying to curtail freedom of speech by passing laws that do so, or by sanctioning violence against people who hold particular opinions. ... which is why I posted the cartoon. The 1st amendment doesn't shield anyone from criticism, feedback or being ignored by others. If Mastodon instances block or blacklist each other, the principle of free speech wasn't violated. What really happened is different groups of private individuals deciding to stop listening or acknowledging other groups of individuals. Is this a morally right or even healthy thing to do? That's highly debatable, depends heavily on the context and who you're talking to and I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all answer to this question. Your mileage may vary, as is always when confronted with murky human behaviour.
  - slightwinder 6y ago
    It's not mob-rule, it's mob-filter, which you can ignore if you know how.
numpad0 6y ago
Instance operators hate two things; disagreement, hate, and outsiders.
- hojjat12000 6y ago
  That's three things.
  - NameDoesntExist 6y ago
    Don't disagree, they hate when you do that.

untog 6y ago

Not being owned by a Silicon Valley giant? No advertising? API access that doesn’t get shut off for idiotic reasons? I’m sure there are plenty more.

throwaw4y-plate 6y ago

Not-federating with people you dont like isn't censorship, y'all.

zanny 6y ago

Twitter is ruled by the will of the company and by extensions its shareholders and by extension of that the interests of capital. The Fediverse broadly isn't really ruled, its about who you participate with. It is to the benefit of Mastodon et al that even though the mainstream deplatforms intolerance it doesn't actively prevent them from using the software, just from using their servers of it. Yea, if you want to be in the mainstream Fediverse you need to play by the consensus rules of that space. But its just that, a consensus of server operators, rather than the will of a corporate entity.

kortilla 6y ago
I’m not sure mob rule is better than a corporate entity in this regard.
- zaarn 6y ago
  If you disagree, you can run a server that doesn't follow consensus. The most common outcome is that you'll be blacklisted or atleast silenced by other instances (silenced meaning only people that deliberately follow see your posts). People who agree with you and don't blacklist your instance can talk and interact with you. That is basically as close to proper free speech as you get. I get my corner of the internet, where I will blacklist nazis and racism, you get yours were you don't.
  - CaptArmchair 6y ago
    I'll leave this relevant xkcd comic here: https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
    - Phrodo_00 6y ago
      The difference is it's federated, so the content is available to everyone that wants it it their server.
      - zaarn 6y ago
        I mean, that's basically why the comment agrees with what I wrote, I think. You're free to federate with whoever you want and other people are free to federate with you or not. Nobody is forced to listen to what you have to say, it's entirely voluntary. Ie, actual free speech.
        CaptArmchair 6y ago
        Exactly. I've clarified this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24036190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24036190 The operative word is "force" which tends to translate to threatening harm or violence. At which point, one tends to contest the prerogative of dominant authority which is usually a sovereign nation state. Depending on where you live, this prerogative is legitimized through a democratically elected mandate and codified in a constitution. This principle sanctions a state to prosecute private citizens exerting violence against each other over differing opinions, beliefs and so on in front of a court of law (separation of powers!) The 1st amendment is the cornerstone, in that it protects private citizens from that same legitimate authority trying to curtail freedom of speech by passing laws that do so, or by sanctioning violence against people who hold particular opinions. ... which is why I posted the cartoon. The 1st amendment doesn't shield anyone from criticism, feedback or being ignored by others. If Mastodon instances block or blacklist each other, the principle of free speech wasn't violated. What really happened is different groups of private individuals deciding to stop listening or acknowledging other groups of individuals. Is this a morally right or even healthy thing to do? That's highly debatable, depends heavily on the context and who you're talking to and I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all answer to this question. Your mileage may vary, as is always when confronted with murky human behaviour.
- slightwinder 6y ago
  It's not mob-rule, it's mob-filter, which you can ignore if you know how.

numpad0 6y ago

Instance operators hate two things; disagreement, hate, and outsiders.

hojjat12000 6y ago
That's three things.
- NameDoesntExist 6y ago
  Don't disagree, they hate when you do that.