A loosely moderated place to ask open ended questions
If your post is
- Open ended
- Not offensive
- Not regarding lemmy support (c/lemmy_support)
- not ad nauseam inducing (please make sure its a question that would be new to most members)
it’s welcome here!
- 0 users online
- 4 users / day
- 22 users / week
- 130 users / month
- 388 users / 6 months
- 3 subscribers
- 1.04K Posts
- 10.6K Comments
I just spent two hours or so watching a debunk video on the alleged Uyghur cultural genocide full of Chinese propaganda and researching the ‘sources’ they claimed because nutomic banned a guy who said there’s a genocide and someone else posted said video.
The Lemmy.ml main instance slowly becomes acidic and people like me will be driven away, slowly leaving the instance to extremist views. I do not see much of the Code of Conduct actually applied.
I really hoped this would be an alternative to Reddit when it turned out voat became a Nazi cesspool and other alternatives were shit technically.
I don’t know if the developers hosting any instance which is naturally seen as the ‘main’ or ‘official’ one is actually a good idea since they need to moderate it instead of making the software better. Not to say they shouldn’t, but…
Internet forums seem to be a doomed concept. The fediverse is usually so inclusive but it’s getting so large that it gets the drama and issues of other platforms.
I’m leaning veeeeeery left and I agree that you don’t talk to/with Nazis, but Lemmy.ml has fallen to the age old leftists calling other leftists not left enough. If they were as united as the world conglomerate of Nazis there would be no fascists. But they hang themselves by the nooses they threaded.
Leftists can’t agree on anything. Fascists can. That’s their superpower.
I don’t know what the solution could be. Banning all users who don’t agree with others seems excessive. Hosting the development somewhere else than a subdomain of the dev-run main instance may mitigate this a little. Not having a flagship instance may mitigate it, too. Maybe separating moderation from administration? Appointing more moderators?
I guess there’s no ideal way to do this. For me as individual the solution might be to leave Lemmy.ml and not participate. But I believe in its ideas and I don’t want to maintain yet another self hosted service.
Someone suggested self hosting lemmy, but what’s the point? I like lemmy.ml, I just don’t like that it’s becoming more radical every day and that it’s so closely affiliated with Lemmy, the software.
It hinders the software’s popularity/adoption. New instances should be created to have another cool instance, not out of spite that you don’t like the main instance.
I don’t know if it was that radical before. I thought most of the really really leftist stuff wandered to lemmygrad.ml.
Maybe having a community called ‘worldnews’ is a bit too broad. Most of the posts I see as problematic were there. On reddit they use r/anime_titties for properly moderated world news.
Sadly I believe that no moderation of a community called world news could be unbiased enough to not let it escalate.
I’d be for banning political discussion on the main instance. With how little say users have when it comes to filtering things here aside from subscribing, it’ll lower a lot of conflict
Yeah, but I doubt the admins would agree.
just my 2 cents, i know the thread isn’t really about this
this is very much like the reference implementation vs reference spec debate, that has yet to reach its resolution, but in any case, it would be a little silly for like 13 people in the beginning to try to organically scatter and decentralize among many instances, and it’s natural that given the number of users on lemmy how centralization would occur in one form or another in the early stages
having a main-ish instance in the beginning was also important for community <-> developer interaction (outside of matrix chat, which is unsuitable for certain forms of discussions)
we may close sign ups for main instances in the future to encourage decentralization
seriously? can you link the thread?
other than that, idk to what extent I agree. on one hand I like certain aspects of Lemmy’s culture, linux, foss, programming, anti-capitalism, anti-corporate, privacy awareness, decentalisation, veganism, libre culture, progressive social values etc, on the other hand I don’t really like some stuff, like leftists defending putin (why? T_T ) ,being so anti-imperialism that they would call any mainstream source propaganda, turning a blind eye when it comes to China’s flaws as if it can’t possibly be wrong in any case, stuff like that.
we should consider that the way Lemmy has been developed and lemmy.ml has been maintained has been deeply ideaological. three admins are marxist-leninists, one is an anarchist and I don’t know about the other one. dessalines and nutomic (who are the two main developers as far as I know) are both deeply invested in their idealogy. personally, it doesn’t bother me. but certainly many people might not like it, I assume that’s why soferman spammed a lot of agenda posts, because the average person might feel unwelcomed and uncomfortable here. don’t get me wrong, the fact that Lemmy has been an idealogical effort is the only reason that has stopped it form becoming another reddit alternative for Nazis, so it has its own advantages and disadvantages.
one solution would be to ask admins to limit their activities to PSAs and banning spammers/scammers and sublemmies that break the code of conduct, and leaving all other forms of moderation to community moderators, which means that admins shouldn’t moderate communities, at least not with their main account. it would also require them to make anonymous accounts to participate in discussions as users instead of using the same admin account.
but do I want to see that happening? idk. maybe not for now. it really depends on what the admins and us want Lemmy and lemmy.ml to become.
I couldn’t agree more.
Well, it’s okay if they are like this, they just should be open about it and not do arbitrary bans for haphazard reasons while at the same time pretending to be morally superior, allowing other viewpoints and following a code of conduct. Or, if they do, they should just admit it. Which would actually be fine with me. Saying “I don’t like you being in that community, so I banned you” is better than to pretend there’s a universal truth that the banned person is a baddie.
oh you mean nutomic banning soferman from c/worldnews? I thought nutomic banned a user for saying there’s a genocide, sorry. nutomic banned them for this comment:
it wasn’t because of Uyghurs or stuff like that.
I don’t have any problem with their idealogies either. actually I like them because it means they’re against capitalism. I was just pointing out that the nature of Lemmy and lemmy.ml isn’t really separated from the idealogy of its creators. and as I said, it has pros and cons.
that being said, I agree that banning soferman was not justified, at least not after they had changed their behavior.
About the banning: This is why I dont like when people dont put me all information.
I got confused certain times because of this. However, this case is different because I read the thread first.
deleted by creator
I think the main thing thats necessary is for users to accept that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It is normal that people disagree, and discuss their disagreements. But those discussions shouldnt be done with the goal of convincing or proselytizing each other. Rather the goal should be to understand each other better. Maybe we should turn this into a site rule?
@firstname.lastname@example.org has shown that he is not able to do this, so I decided to ban him from /c/worldnews, here is my comment which explains it a bit more. Also check out my previous comment in case you didnt see it (I made a mistake there, I really should have called out soferman as well).
Regarding the part about DW and other news sources, I think it would be interesting to make a new community to discuss that. We can have a threat for each website, and discuss their biases and perspectives. Of course that will need good moderation, people calling “conspiracy theory” or “fascist” with nothing to back it up should not be permitted.
I think trying to convince others isn’t that bad if it means educating one another, I mean the fact that we’re on Lemmy means that we already appreciate FOSS and decentralised networks and are probably leftists. with such a community there will always be other interesting things and ideas that one can learn and understand to become a better person. since we use the same network and socialise it’s natural to become a bit more similar to each other, and that’s ok.
@email@example.com had an interesting idea about using a method called “adversarial collabration” with strict moderation to get better results and avoid fights. it’s worth considering that maybe our current system of discussing politics on platforms like reddit and Lemmy is broken, and maybe if adversarial collabration gave better results, we can go forward and design a better model.
deleted by creator
I’m gonna defeat the tankies anyway
you talk as if it’s a war here, it’s not. most of us are here for different reasons, but fighting isn’t one of them.
It was a joke. There is no conceivable way I’ll defeat them. Which is also ironic comment it’s in a thread talking about becoming less hostile.
IDK maybe I shouldn’t add jokes, people will take it litterally. I feel it was pretty apparent, but I also understand sarcasm on the internet isn’t very easy to read
considering your actions it’s very easy to misunderstand your joke. maybe add /s to it, idk.
I’m sorry for your ban, but I think if your jokes seem so serious then you can’t blame those who take it seriously. /s is your friend.
They want chaos or a literal war out of either pastime hobby or actual intentiond to divide Lemmy up because they cannot ingest the fact that a safe space, free of reactionaries and pro imperialist liberals can exist on internet without it becoming like Gab or Raddle like.
I would say this is only a hypothesis solely by me, but I am open to expressing my views boldly and more often than not my whiskers can tell the tale.
I do not think I have seen anyone in my life like this person, after a couple decades of using internet. Yeah I am an Indian internet dinosaur.
Edit: I’m redacting this, I see the context now
I think they meant the singular they. ;)
Yeah heheh I misunderstood
I used they because I do not know your gender and do not need to know either.
Oh, I misunderstood. Using they like that can be pretty sinister in such a context. But I understand now. Sorry
In your dreams. You may have a better chance at 4chan /pol/ or r/worldnews maybe.
deleted by creator
a pop up like that would be really helpful and a protection against spamming. each time I look at the main page I see the whle instance spammed to death :(
The fellows you are talking about are divided fundamentally over two things - one group wants critical thinking, self analysis and critical discussion, and the other wants everyone to rely on a centralised “fact checker” group instead of critical thinking and create one dimensional confirmation bias echo chamber out of this way of (lack of) thinking.
You cannot tell the person who has stopped thinking for themselves, to be self critical and have an analytical approach. You are trying to mix water and oil.
Edit: and sőferman and their friend or alt keep downvoting me wherever I critique their doings, and they do this to all the “authoritarian” people they hate and even manipulate Lemmy trending posts as well. They are people with disrespect for honest, factual discussion ethics.
deleted by creator
This sounds like a way of getting a common identity here. And that is something I agree should be cultivated!
However, I think that the common ground so far is tacit, in that users seem to appreciate FLOSS and decentralized software. That is exactly how I found Lemmy in the first place.
But more importantly, the points of disagreement are fundamental! By that I mean that they reflect different world views that sometimes clash inevitably because they arise from different basic understandings of what the world is like. In effect, this makes it so that searching common ground (or at least in the way that I think you’re proposing) doesn’t change those fundamental schemas.
This is not to say that it doesn’t create a common identity, but it misses the mark as to what people care about.
But your sentiment is still laudable! And in that line, what I think can be done is discuss those fundamental differences in a kind way and use effective rhetorical tools to have people clearly see and perhaps identify with your view. This, as the practice that could become part of our Lemmy Identity™️©️®️, could arrive at the common ground that you rightly want.
deleted by creator