Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Saturday, 24-Feb-2024 07:57:36 JST LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864}
   I haven't seen an announcement, but a friend who uses the "Ubuntu Social" https://ubuntu.social/ #Mastodon instance reports that the instance will be shutting down soon.
   
   He was concerned about the strict rules that most major Mastodon sites have, so I pointed out that he isn't limited to Mastodon. I also told him that there are some wide-open instances, but that they tend to attract some vile people. It is probably best to find an instance with rules that are "loose enough" to let you be yourself but strict enough to kick those vile people out.
   
   I'm not a fan of dictatorial admins, but if you don't have some sort of rules, you get nicecrew.digital or poa.st (or left-wing equivalents of these right-wing sites).
   
   One could easily wish that these extremists (right and left) would be exiled to some island, where they can torment one another but cannot contact the rest of us.
   • LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     simsa03 (simsa03@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Saturday, 24-Feb-2024 09:03:05 JST simsa03

     in reply to

     • Hannes
     You may remember how I complained for years about moderation, rules, instance blocking by admins, etc. I saw a direct connection between restriction of free (unimpeded) speech and restriction of federation (with a split into various sub-diverses). Why block whole instances when (at least in principle) every user can decide for himself what content to allow in his TL and what not?
     
     Contemplating my experiences on X, in which moderation has drastically receeded and where I less and less feel comfortable to be around, I recently came to the conclusion that I may have been wrong. That indeed some moderation and blocking of accounts and instances on the level of instances and admins seems necessary. Otherwise, at least on X, you spend the half of your time muting and blocking. Why would one waste one's time in *such* activities.
     
     Still, I don't know. But I feel the advocates of moderation (broadly understood) had a far better understanding than I had.
     
     cc @hannes
     LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} likes this.
     Hannes repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Hannes (hannes@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Sunday, 25-Feb-2024 07:36:55 JST Hannes

     in reply to

     • simsa03
     @simsa03 i don't think federated social media should try to be a better version of the big commercial platforms. same same but more freedom and more privacy or whatever. the point of it all for me was to put the power over the platforms in the users' own hands, or at least much closer to their hands. then we would have the power to completely transform social media from a time sucking black hole of pointless reactions to pr and trolls, into something that could be a useful tool connecting people who wanted to transform the whole of society. having that perspective and those goals, blocking whole instances was a non issue for me. of course we didn't want to waste any time "discussing" free speech with alt-right maniacs or people posting child pornography. *block* and good bye. we had no interest in being on that playing field (or island, @lnxw48a1), we were trying to do something completely else. mimicking existing social media was just the first step, and i thought we were very clear about that. but i don't think most people ever got it. now i'm no longer sure social media, federated or not, has the potential to organize anything useful. maybe the the real stuff must be done in reality, afk.
   • Embed this notice
     simsa03 (simsa03@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Sunday, 25-Feb-2024 08:42:08 JST simsa03

     in reply to

     • Hannes
     Oh, you made that point – power into the users' hands to facilitate social change... – perfectly clear back then. At least for you and your friends (as far as I remember) that premise was a given, and the blocking of "sideshows" a natural consequence. To me, back then, that felt like contradicting the goal stated, but I understood that you and others had the hassle with running an instance and, gosh!, one really likes to come to the real work that one is interested in instead of being stuck in perpetual housekeeping... ;-) And yes, it was a an attempt to find out if social media could be used for change. I didn't share that optimisim (if that is the right word) back then, and I don't do now. But mostly because I don't think that social change (or societal change) can be achieved on a grassroot level at all. In my somber moments I think: "If you want to change society, change infrastructure, the rest is idle talk." Perhaps this attitude changes again one day. Cheers.
     LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} and Hannes like this.