this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2023
443 points (98.3% liked)

sh.itjust.works Main Community

7728 readers
1 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

Matrix

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The instance seems to be mostly right wing trolls. I know defederating is unpopular but I don't think much is to be lost in this case and it can save the mods some headaches.

Edit: the response on exploding-heads.com to my reporting of transphobia. Courtesy of the "second in command"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nude@kbin.social 93 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I dont see why defederation is seen as a sensitive topic.

Its a great feature, designed for specifically this purpose.

Over time people will migrate between instances and land where they fit. Some people want to be abrasive cunts, and they will land with the other abrasive cunts. Thats great, they have an instance they can do what they want on.

For the rest of us though, we dont want to see their bad faith articles and abrasiveness on our feeds. No one is being limited in their speech, but they might be limited in their reach. If they want to expand their reach, they can join a more broadly federated instance and ditch the bad faith arguments and abrasiveness.

Its the kids table at the dinner party. You can join the adults table if you behave in a way that is suitable for the adults, if not go back and play with the kids and everyone is happy.

[–] eta_aquarid@kbin.social 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The example that introduced me to federation was like an instance getting overrun with Nazis, and everyone deciding to just cut that instance loose; let it float alone as "the Nazi instance" that nobody has to interact with.

I thought that stuff like bad actors and assholes was one of the main reasons for the idea of federation, really surprised how many people thought differently

[–] nude@kbin.social 43 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think people would be surprised at the amount of instances that have already been broadly defederated.

Its just that the beehaw defederation is the first "big" incident since broader adoption, and thats for very understandable reasons with a roadmap to refederation already in place.

The only people who get angry about an instance being defederated are the types who want to act in bad faith. They know if they join the instance they got defederated from they will be banned if they spruik the shit that got the instance defederated in the first place, so they are angry that no one wants to listen to their shit.

It sucks for legitimate users that get caught up, but if youre a good user willing to participate in good faith, just join another instance and carry on.

[–] eta_aquarid@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In Beehaw's case especially I saw a lot of people who came off more that they took being defederated personally or that they felt entitled to Beehaw's communities than anything

like I still can't understand why people found it so abhorrent that Beehaw temporarily defederated; they literally stated why and explicitly stated that it's probably not permanent

like they made it clear, people just didn't bother to read for some reason

[–] Otome-chan@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

I respect beehaw's ability to defederate and their decisions to do with their community as they please. I don't agree with their actions and I don't think they did the right thing. But that's why I did not and will not sign up on beehaw.

But if people start defederating each other over slight disagreements? I think that's bad for the idea of federation in general.

[–] Otome-chan@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My perspective isn't so much that I'd like to act in bad faith, but rather that I do not wish for others to dictate who I may speak to or what beliefs I may hold. It's one thing to have a standard of civility, respect, and polite discourse and to avoid those who do not act as such. It's another to ban/censor/close off people over a disagreement of perspective.

Defederation is top-level admins building a wall, forcing people to either have two accounts to interact with both groups, or to move and find somewhere that isn't defederated. If you don't want to see certain content or talk to someone, why not just block them? why block for everyone? I don't get that view. I avoid signing up on instances like beehaw because I know they're quick to defederate. if you want that sorta thing, why not go join them?

[–] nude@kbin.social 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your "right" to expression doesnt extend to forcing other people to listen to you.
I dont know why that seems to be such a common thought.

You have a "want" - in that you want to be able to say whatever you want to whoever you want.
Other people also have a "want" - to not have to see that shit when they are just chilling on the internet.

We find ourselves at a point where we are on a platform that allows problematic places to be excluded. People there can still say and do what they want, the majority just doesnt have to see or deal with it anymore.

No one is dictating what you can and cant do or say, you are free to do that.

What defederation does is create a place for people who dont care about that shit to exist without having to see it. By defederating at an instance level, it takes that burden away from the individual user and creates a place that they want to be at. If you dont want to be there thats fine.

Its only a problem with people who think like yourself because you want to push your views onto people who arent interested. You want your views to dictate how another community behaves. You dont get to dictate that though. You're welcome to join if you want to follow their rules, if not find somewhere with rules that you agree with.

As for myself agreeing with beehaw, I interact with that instance regularly. I dont need an account there because I have accounts elsewhere that are federated with them. If those other accounts became defederated, id weigh up the pros and cons and create a local account if I wanted to continue the interaction.

This is a fundamental, core aspect of the fediverse. If being restricted from places that you arent welcome at is something you dont like, I sincerely think the fediverse is not for you. That said, I cant think of many places that are for people who want to push their views onto unwilling others, because the places that spruik that arent attractive to the people who are sick of that shit.

There are places for the type of content you want to engage with. There are even places that are halfway, where people from both sides of this divide meet and converse. The problem only exists when you want to bring that shit into places where it isnt welcome, and the fediverse has been designed from the ground up to alleviate that problem for the majority of people who arent interested.

[–] Otome-chan@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

Your "right" to expression doesnt extend to forcing other people to listen to you.

Indeed. That's why the block button exists. If you don't want to hear someone, you can block them. But if two people wish to speak, why do you feel like you should prevent them from speaking to each other?

You have a "want" - in that you want to be able to say whatever you want to whoever you want.

No. My "want" is to be able to discuss things, understand where people are coming from, and arrive at something that is mutually beneficial. The best way to do that is to avoid censorship nazis.

to not have to see that shit when they are just chilling on the internet.

Yes, I'm fully in favor of people curating their own experience, not the experience of others.

What defederation does is create a place for people who dont care about that shit to exist without having to see it.

Actually it prevents other people who do care from seeing it. Defederation is not a "personal block button" it's a wall preventing anyone on the instances from communicating.

Its only a problem with people who think like yourself because you want to push your views onto people who arent interested.

The opposite, actually. I'm in favor of people blocking who they want. We are both on kbin. If I wish to see posts by those exploding head guys and you do not, what do we do? If we defederate, you are forcing your desires onto me. If you just block them yourself personally, then you get what you want, and I get what I want. win win, right? So I don't understand why you would defederate, rather than just block?

You want your views to dictate how another community behaves.

The opposite. I've spoken many times that beehaw and sh.itjust.works are entirely free to do what they want. I don't agree with those communities defederating, but naturally they're gonna do what they're gonna do.

As for myself agreeing with beehaw, I interact with that instance regularly. I dont need an account there because I have accounts elsewhere that are federated with them. If those other accounts became defederated, id weigh up the pros and cons and create a local account if I wanted to continue the interaction.

If you like beehaw's federation policies, and not kbin's, why not use beehaw instead of kbin? Surely that is the obvious thing to do?

If being restricted from places that you arent welcome at is something you dont like, I sincerely think the fediverse is not for you.

My concern is over my own instance preventing me from speaking to others. If beehaw wishes to block kbin, I'm not gonna cry over it, I can speak to people elsewhere. But if kbin starts defederating, then I have an issue. I believe most places will wish to have open and civil discussions and federate with more or less everyone. This is how kbin currently does things, and I support that. But if everyone is just going to defederate each other, why bother with federation at all?