3 ms·

It doesn't relate specially to trans speech; KixiQu's comment above observed that fediverse instances seem to moderate out transphobia more than Twitter. Then

by Digory 6y ago

It doesn't relate specially to trans speech; KixiQu's comment above observed that fediverse instances seem to moderate out transphobia more than Twitter. Then JL6 asked if fediverse is moderating itself into a silo. I'm saying moderation and exclusion are traditional tools in responding to offensive speech in private fora. But moderation and exclusion can become too good. We've seen right and left choose into bubbles big enough to sway elections with outrageous false claims. The Twitter and AWS response to bad speech generated by free-choice silos is to enforce their own, bigger silencing or moderation policy. I'd like to find ways where people can grow, adapt, and cooperate more when they encounter hostile, offensive, or untrue beliefs or speech online.

sjg007 6y ago
Ah I see that you responded to a different thread in this one! That requires someone to read an entire tree of comments instead of the family stack. This branching problem is also the curse of slack btw... I'm not sure anyone has solved the context dependency problem especially well except maybe with hyperlinks.. :) Anyway... I see a similar outcome in both the fediverse and the conglomerate with respect to consensus. In one aspect you have downvotes and in the other you have downvotes. The ties that bind are friends maintaining connections and then, well interests. I'm not sure how antifragility fits in here or if it is relevant and what it actually means in this context. Do you mean "the body politic"? It's an interesting hypothesis but I don't see an evidence for it. The bigger question is the "tyranny of the majority", "the tyranny of the minority" and "the loudest voice and the squeaky wheel of appeasing". To jump to a sibling thread, the fediverse does solve the authoritarian problem which seems to be a good thing which was analogous to the decentralized internet. In the fediverse Trump tweets would still exist.. but would they have the same impact? Anyway, lots of PhDs will be written on this subject. If you are so inspired cite this comment one day and all of my HN posts will have been worth it!

by Digory 6y ago

sjg007 6y ago

Ah I see that you responded to a different thread in this one! That requires someone to read an entire tree of comments instead of the family stack. This branching problem is also the curse of slack btw... I'm not sure anyone has solved the context dependency problem especially well except maybe with hyperlinks.. :) Anyway... I see a similar outcome in both the fediverse and the conglomerate with respect to consensus. In one aspect you have downvotes and in the other you have downvotes. The ties that bind are friends maintaining connections and then, well interests. I'm not sure how antifragility fits in here or if it is relevant and what it actually means in this context. Do you mean "the body politic"? It's an interesting hypothesis but I don't see an evidence for it. The bigger question is the "tyranny of the majority", "the tyranny of the minority" and "the loudest voice and the squeaky wheel of appeasing". To jump to a sibling thread, the fediverse does solve the authoritarian problem which seems to be a good thing which was analogous to the decentralized internet. In the fediverse Trump tweets would still exist.. but would they have the same impact? Anyway, lots of PhDs will be written on this subject. If you are so inspired cite this comment one day and all of my HN posts will have been worth it!