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"
No, don't de-federate. If you don't like it, block it, easy as that.
Lemmy is meant to be better than reddit, which means dealing with opposing views. If they're triggering or offensive to you, block them.
As far as I am concerned there is nothing to be lost by defederating with an instance whose most active communities are devoted to transphobia and covid conspiracy shit. It's not a matter of both sides having value they bring to the table. They are wrong, and we have nothing to gain from a federations with them.
I've already watched at least two people get banned for sharing a story that doesn't jive with the popular opinion on some instances.
I don't want another echochamber.
I've been banned because I used the British Cigarette word about my experience of homophobia. Truly hilarious.
I'm not British, but when camping my friends use the original meaning of the word "faggot".
Hey, the fire's about to die, bring us another faggot.
They say the exact same about you.
But unlike you, they are willing to engage, though nonsensically. Maybe you should try finding some common ground, or convince them, or just make fun of them if they peep their heads out of their echo-chambers, which they most certainly will not. I've been active and haven't seen a single user from exploding-heads outside of their instance.
There are enough echo-chamber verses as it is, we don't need sh.it to become yet another.
There is a very big difference between being willing to engage with those whose viewpoints are different to yours and supporting a hateful, bigoted rhetoric.
No one is encouraging sh.itjust.works to become an echo chamber because so one is suggesting viewpoints to be the basis of the instance. Only being against bigotry, which is already in the sh.it terms.
I agree.
But do you want them to be blocked? Or kept a close eye on?
Did you look at the image OP provided of the response from the "second in command" of EH?
He opens with stating that he will only ban in those certain cases (ok, reasonable to provide expectations for when you will ban), but when you read the cases they are actually situations for which he is legally required as the admin to report to law enforcement authorities, and he doesn't indicate that he will do that, just ban. So, are we to believe he will actually handle those properly?
What about if he feels a post isn't quite violent enough to be banned, or if the plans to commit a crime weren't quite specific enough to be considered ban-worthy? What if something that is "anti-jew" (to use his word) he considers to just be fact? What's "over-the-top" racism to him?
I did go over to the instance to get some first hand knowledge, and from the little bit if scrolling I did, it's a mixed bag. But this admission from the "second in command" looks like it's giving the green light to every one.
So we're holding him responsible for things that haven't even happened yet? That doesn't seem fair.
You know you can just ask him all of these things, right? If you want, I can even ping him so he can answer you within this very thread, something that will not be possible if they got blocked.
Which is why the questions were raised. I am one of the ones that pointed out to you that we are not discouraging engaging in open discussion. I am also not in the instance bring discussed at this moment - as you pointed out on multiple occasions, despite the benefits to this discussion including all instances as I have pointed out multiple times. However, these are also questions I feel you should ponder, as well as others in this thread, which might inspire other questions or thoughts. That's the point of posting a comment on a forum.
true that
That means running the fediverse on non-proprietary software, not forcing the end-users to interact with conspiracy theorists
They're a tiny instance with even smaller communities, just block them and you're set.
So we just wait until they're a big instance with big communities before we start considering that it might be a good idea to not let them interact with an instance that has rules against them? 🤔
Exactly. r/thedonald started as a tiny joke sub started by 4Chan that wasn't dealt with until it became a festering cesspool of hate that became big enough to be a serious problem, brigading other subs and spreading hateful rhetoric. It has to be nipped in the bud and made clear that it is not welcome.
Our instance’s rules are for our own instance. If they come over here and start spewing ridiculous nonsense, then sure, we should start banning them. For now they aren’t even causing much trouble. If they do in the future then I’d support defederating, but I disagree with jumping the gun.
The alt-right became an issue because social media gave it the reach it never had in the past, you're arguing to let them have reach until they become problematic instead of preventing the issue in the first place, by the time they become problematic the number of converts will have increased, all because some people feel bad for them.
Firstly, the alt-right is far from a modern issue. And secondly it’s nothing to do with feeling bad for them. I couldn’t agree less with the nonsense they’re saying there. I’m saying that defederating them doesn’t “prevent the issue in the first place” at all. Isolating communities only makes them get more extreme over time. Refusing to let them interact with us only causes their beliefs to be echoed and amplified in their communities. And I should clarify again, by no means am I saying that they should be allowed to promote their hateful messages here. If they break the rules of our instance, here in our instance, they should be banned, simple.
The scale of it is a modern issue, far right extremists existed in the past, never have their ideas been as mainstream as they are today, social media and a certain politician gave them a reach they never had in the past. It's much harder to get people hooked when you have to meet them in person to recruit, now you just "question things" on digital public spaces and you'll have people who will start following you.
Isolating them is the solution because, for every one of them that gets out because they're exposed to other points of views, you've got hundreds or thousands being exposed to their message.
Moderation isn't instantaneous either so saying "We'll delete their message as they post it" just isn't a logical solution when you've got the capacity to just prevent them from taking part in the discussion in the first place.
They already have their spaces to radicalize themselves, the goal of taking part in discussions on general forums is just to get people to enter the spiral and to move the window of what is and isn't acceptable. Just look at what happened on /r/Canada, that place was becoming a right wing cesspool before metacanada was forcefully shutdown. Why? Because the mods decided to tolerate bigots.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnzkA_HMFtQ
No one is forcing anything. You’re allowed to block them, so do just that. If anything, defederating is the more “forcing” course of action.
Blocking them means I'm interacting with their posts
I'm pretty sure it wasn't meant to be better, just different. While I'm never going back to reddit, if the one who owns the server makes a choice on the content of their server, I can decide whether or not I agree and stay or move. THAT is what's good about this system. You can stick to the instance that follows your ideology.
Okay, then move if you don't enjoy the instances available. Personally I'd like to see the blocked instances on a user-level instead of a mod-level.
That functionality doesn't exist yet as far as I know so the best bet is to ask the instance you're on "Would we defederate over this" and if the answer is no, change instances