4 ms·

> any instance hosting the harry potter lady would get defederated from by 90% of the network If you are getting defederated by 90% of the network, isn't that

by mike_d 4y ago

> any instance hosting the harry potter lady would get defederated from by 90% of the network If you are getting defederated by 90% of the network, isn't that maybe a strong indication that 90% don't want to hear what you have to say? Freedom of speech is a protection against the government censoring you. It doesn't mean you get to spread hate and toxicity freely without consequence.

throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
yea, that's what I'm saying - mastodon is the perfect fit for those people, so this is not an Eternal September kind of event.
paul_funyun 4y ago
No, it indicates only that the administrators of 90% of the network don't want others to hear what you have to say. If the admins don't want to hear you they'd use the block function.
- blowski 4y ago
  In which case, somebody will set up an alternative server which doesn't block them, and people will move there. People who love the free market should _love_ Mastodon.
  - paul_funyun 4y ago
    That doesn't follow from the fact that admin decisions don't reflect the will of the userbase. I'm not a fan of my state' laws about fishing licenses, but that doesn't mean I'll move to another state. Same for Mastodon users. I expect clients that combine timelines from alt accounts using different servers to become the norm. Users get all the benefits, with more ability to opt out. If I've got Jim@alt.net on banning-instance, and Mike@tim.com on the banned instance, and their timelines are combined client-side, it's the best of both worlds.
    - easrng 4y ago
      If you don't trust and share ideals with your admin you are doing it wrong.
fleddr 4y ago
Let's say that you're right, and that 90% of Mastodon instances would want to block the Harry Potter lady. This isn't really true, they're pressured into doing this by ruthless activists, but let's pretend that the blockage is genuine and voluntary. If that is true, it means Mastodon misaligns with probably some 90% of the political spectrum that would absolutely not want to take away her speech, regardless of whether people agree with her. Which means...Mastodon is a far-left echo chamber. Which doesn't have to be bad, everybody deserves to have their place. I'm just saying it's not suitable for mainstream usage.
- PuppyTailWags 4y ago
  Wait.. why wouldn't the blocks be genuine and voluntary?? Instance admins are volunteers, often times literally the instance is on their hardware. If they didn't like it they can ban activists and defederate from activist instances.
  - fleddr 4y ago
    Because an instance mod/admin can be socially pressured to join a ban party, or else be labeled as "fascist".
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by mike_d 4y ago

throwaway0x7E6 4y ago

yea, that's what I'm saying - mastodon is the perfect fit for those people, so this is not an Eternal September kind of event.

paul_funyun 4y ago

No, it indicates only that the administrators of 90% of the network don't want others to hear what you have to say. If the admins don't want to hear you they'd use the block function.

blowski 4y ago
In which case, somebody will set up an alternative server which doesn't block them, and people will move there. People who love the free market should _love_ Mastodon.
- paul_funyun 4y ago
  That doesn't follow from the fact that admin decisions don't reflect the will of the userbase. I'm not a fan of my state' laws about fishing licenses, but that doesn't mean I'll move to another state. Same for Mastodon users. I expect clients that combine timelines from alt accounts using different servers to become the norm. Users get all the benefits, with more ability to opt out. If I've got Jim@alt.net on banning-instance, and Mike@tim.com on the banned instance, and their timelines are combined client-side, it's the best of both worlds.
  - easrng 4y ago
    If you don't trust and share ideals with your admin you are doing it wrong.

fleddr 4y ago

Let's say that you're right, and that 90% of Mastodon instances would want to block the Harry Potter lady. This isn't really true, they're pressured into doing this by ruthless activists, but let's pretend that the blockage is genuine and voluntary. If that is true, it means Mastodon misaligns with probably some 90% of the political spectrum that would absolutely not want to take away her speech, regardless of whether people agree with her. Which means...Mastodon is a far-left echo chamber. Which doesn't have to be bad, everybody deserves to have their place. I'm just saying it's not suitable for mainstream usage.

PuppyTailWags 4y ago
Wait.. why wouldn't the blocks be genuine and voluntary?? Instance admins are volunteers, often times literally the instance is on their hardware. If they didn't like it they can ban activists and defederate from activist instances.
- fleddr 4y ago
  Because an instance mod/admin can be socially pressured to join a ban party, or else be labeled as "fascist".

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]