5 ms·

I'm on Beehaw, and I like the way the defederation was handled. Here's the latest from them: https://beehaw.org/post/594843 https://beehaw.org/post/594843 You c

I'm on Beehaw, and I like the way the defederation was handled. Here's the latest from them: https://beehaw.org/post/594843 https://beehaw.org/post/594843 You can see some positive comments from users about the change and a transparent road map for re-federating. To put it another way, would you want to join an instance that isn't trying (or is failing to) contain harassment and other forms of bad actors? That's the challenge the de-fed is addressing: https://beehaw.org/post/567170 https://beehaw.org/post/567170

jorvi 3y ago
> harassment Harassment is such a vague term and has been stretched out to cover such a huge swathe that it can basically used to police almost anything.
- 8organicbits 3y ago
  Agreed. This is a strength of federation. Pick an instance that defines the term the same way you do. Communities with strong usage guidelines, like HN, can feel very safe to use.
  - jorvi 3y ago
    I actually dislike the moderation here, in some instances it is extremely biased. I can remember an example of a post and discussion around tech, feminism, and how much of society has looped around to benefit women, and any comment that wasn’t overly positive on feminism immediately got detached from the post for “being inciting”. After requested clarification, it was explained that this was done because it is a contentious topic that has high likelihood of getting heated, but moderation was completely blind to how allowing only one visible perspective on an issue completely distorts how a community’s stance at large on that issue is perceived. HN is more of a case of “least worst” rather than “best”, for me.
  - epcoa 3y ago
    > Pick an instance that defines the term the same way you do. And this is why the idea of the fediverse (outside of a content blind common carrier type scenario) is DOA. Once you get outside spam and widely illegal shit, defining the "terms the same way you do" has nearly as many possibilities as users, and the overlap of that Venn diagram does not exist - so the natural evolution is just a bunch of tiny instances none of which want to federate with another. The only purpose these new fediverse systems seem to have is for disjoint communities to increase availability - in one of the clumsiest ways possible and at the wrong level of abstraction.
  - nerdbert 3y ago
    To me this is a weakness; it requires me to read between the lines of a whole horde of different instances' statements of principles and try to make an informed decision based on that. Many people don't have that kind of time/interest/inclination, they just want to be able to read some discussions.
  - willis936 3y ago
    HN does not ask the user to dance to be let in. Rules and guidelines are stated, users are freely let in, then moderation is reactionary rather than proactive. Beehaw takes the worst parts of mob mentality and label it as a positive thing. I'm sure it's a cozy club, but they will not be learning anything they aren't already wholly convinced of.
phpisthebest 3y ago
Seems like beehaw is a very pro-censorship platform, and everything that social media should not be, so it will be a hard pass for me. Social media is a big enough echo chamber Edit: Now having read their "What is Beehaw" Post [1], I can clearly see I was correct and would NEVER want to be a part of that oppressive community, That post is fill with political ideology, plainly false statements, and mental contractions... wow. just wow [1] https://beehaw.org/post/107014 https://beehaw.org/post/107014
- enragedcacti 3y ago
  It isn't trying to be a platform, its trying to be a community in the same sense that a church or a softball league is a community. That takes handling things differently and they can afford doing that because its a federated network where someone who doesn't want to be OPPRESSED can just go to a different instance. > Our goal is to create a platform in which nice people will want to stick around so that the experience is less toxic than other websites and because of such it needs to resemble an offline community - the rules must be more open to interpretation and the way the rules are interpreted needs to be a community effort. > We want this to be a community - this means that discussions about behavior should organically arise. When someone violates a rule they aren’t banned immediately, but rather reminded that they need to behave appropriately. In the offline world, this might resemble a friend asking you about how you treated their friend, a pastor pulling you aside and talking to you about how you’ve seemed on edge lately, or security asking you not to vape inside their establishment. Beehaw is a Community: https://beehaw.org/post/140733 https://beehaw.org/post/140733
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    >>It isn't trying to be a platform They state they are a platform 16 times on the link I provided including directly saying ". Beehaw is a social media platform. "
    - enragedcacti 3y ago
      Fair, I shouldn't have hinged on my comment on that as I read some amount of ideological neutrality into the word "platform" that they apparently don't.
NikkiA 3y ago
I see some real trash-tier posts from lemmy.world that show up on kbin but not, thankfully, beehaw. I think they were right to defederate.

jorvi 3y ago

> harassment Harassment is such a vague term and has been stretched out to cover such a huge swathe that it can basically used to police almost anything.

8organicbits 3y ago
Agreed. This is a strength of federation. Pick an instance that defines the term the same way you do. Communities with strong usage guidelines, like HN, can feel very safe to use.
- jorvi 3y ago
  I actually dislike the moderation here, in some instances it is extremely biased. I can remember an example of a post and discussion around tech, feminism, and how much of society has looped around to benefit women, and any comment that wasn’t overly positive on feminism immediately got detached from the post for “being inciting”. After requested clarification, it was explained that this was done because it is a contentious topic that has high likelihood of getting heated, but moderation was completely blind to how allowing only one visible perspective on an issue completely distorts how a community’s stance at large on that issue is perceived. HN is more of a case of “least worst” rather than “best”, for me.
- epcoa 3y ago
  > Pick an instance that defines the term the same way you do. And this is why the idea of the fediverse (outside of a content blind common carrier type scenario) is DOA. Once you get outside spam and widely illegal shit, defining the "terms the same way you do" has nearly as many possibilities as users, and the overlap of that Venn diagram does not exist - so the natural evolution is just a bunch of tiny instances none of which want to federate with another. The only purpose these new fediverse systems seem to have is for disjoint communities to increase availability - in one of the clumsiest ways possible and at the wrong level of abstraction.
- nerdbert 3y ago
  To me this is a weakness; it requires me to read between the lines of a whole horde of different instances' statements of principles and try to make an informed decision based on that. Many people don't have that kind of time/interest/inclination, they just want to be able to read some discussions.
- willis936 3y ago
  HN does not ask the user to dance to be let in. Rules and guidelines are stated, users are freely let in, then moderation is reactionary rather than proactive. Beehaw takes the worst parts of mob mentality and label it as a positive thing. I'm sure it's a cozy club, but they will not be learning anything they aren't already wholly convinced of.

phpisthebest 3y ago

Seems like beehaw is a very pro-censorship platform, and everything that social media should not be, so it will be a hard pass for me. Social media is a big enough echo chamber Edit: Now having read their "What is Beehaw" Post [1], I can clearly see I was correct and would NEVER want to be a part of that oppressive community, That post is fill with political ideology, plainly false statements, and mental contractions... wow. just wow [1] https://beehaw.org/post/107014 https://beehaw.org/post/107014

enragedcacti 3y ago
It isn't trying to be a platform, its trying to be a community in the same sense that a church or a softball league is a community. That takes handling things differently and they can afford doing that because its a federated network where someone who doesn't want to be OPPRESSED can just go to a different instance. > Our goal is to create a platform in which nice people will want to stick around so that the experience is less toxic than other websites and because of such it needs to resemble an offline community - the rules must be more open to interpretation and the way the rules are interpreted needs to be a community effort. > We want this to be a community - this means that discussions about behavior should organically arise. When someone violates a rule they aren’t banned immediately, but rather reminded that they need to behave appropriately. In the offline world, this might resemble a friend asking you about how you treated their friend, a pastor pulling you aside and talking to you about how you’ve seemed on edge lately, or security asking you not to vape inside their establishment. Beehaw is a Community: https://beehaw.org/post/140733 https://beehaw.org/post/140733
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  >>It isn't trying to be a platform They state they are a platform 16 times on the link I provided including directly saying ". Beehaw is a social media platform. "
  - enragedcacti 3y ago
    Fair, I shouldn't have hinged on my comment on that as I read some amount of ideological neutrality into the word "platform" that they apparently don't.

NikkiA 3y ago

I see some real trash-tier posts from lemmy.world that show up on kbin but not, thankfully, beehaw. I think they were right to defederate.