falconfetus8

I noped out of Beehaw when I read this. Those bolded parts(and only the bolded parts) raised some alarm bells in my brain.

The issue as I see it with modern social media is the way in which rules are enforced. There are many good reasons to itemize specific behavior which is not allowed, but the downside is that extremely specific rules are easy to maneuver around. We’ve all experienced someone who’s a real jerk on the internet but manages to never get banned because they never explicitly violate any rules. I’m not sexist, they’ll claim, but happen to post a lot of articles calling into question modern feminism or criticize the wage gap.

I think many people today would agree that someone ‘debating’ the benefits of phrenology in the open would constitute racist behavior, but there was a time and place in the world where it was considered real science, despite many scientists distancing themselves from this field very early on and critics writing scathing commentaries on this emerging field. This same guise of civility is frequently exercised by bigots, with modern examples of sexism, homophobia and transphobia being easily found on nearly any major social media platform.

Humans are pretty good at figuring out when someone is being a dick online, even if they are acting within the defined rules, and one solution to this problem is to recenter humans in our online social platforms. The idea of not having a ton of explicit rules, and instead having simple rules like “Be(e) nice” is a startling one for most, because it upends what we’ve come to know and expect from the internet. However, by keeping the rules simple and instead attempting to enforce the spirit behind the rules, we’re able to deal more effectively with problematic individuals and create a space in which you aren’t worried about whether you’re going to have explain to someone why you’re a human and why you shouldn’t be subject to incessant bigotry online.

The lack of clear rules just sounds ripe for power tripping.

Do note that I am NOT objecting to the need to create a bigotry-free zone. It's important that Lemmy avoids getting infected by racism and hate, lest it end up like Voat. It's just those bolded parts that give me bad vibes about the place.

The big migration hasn't happened yet. There's going to be a big spike in new users during the blackout, and then again when Apollo shuts down.

No, the one on Lemmy.ml will win, since that's the first place new users are going.

I mean, yeah. You broke the self-promotion rule. It's a kind of a dumb rule IMO. "You're allowed to promote things, but just not your things.". Someone other than you promoting Lemmy wouldn't be breaking the rules.

So, there's no real mystery here.

Is that really forbidden, though? Lemmy itself is open source, but that doesn't mean clients are forced to be as well(there are plenty of closed source email clients, after all, even though the protocol is open).