r/The_Donald now on Lemmy (edit: not anymore)

It was banned on Reddit because it is racist, hatefull and spread Conspiracies.

In my new community I expect the exclution of racist communities. It is easy now with defederation. Nazis can do whatever they want on their instances, but the instances I want to be part of should not amplify their shit and flush it into our timelines.

The instance-admin of !thedonald did not reply to my message. Big instances seem not to defederate with them.

The new TD may not be a success, the point is not to give Nazis a platform like it is happening now. Fans of TD are racists.

Where are the instances that show face against racism?

edit: to contact the admins: @donut @TheDude @smorks

edit2: @TheDude deleted the community :)

xtremeownage, (edited )

… Stop fearmongering.

The_Donald, isn’t on lemmy. It’s here: patriots.win

After reddit booted them, they built their own reddit. I am pretty sure, they aren’t interested in moving here, as that would ruin their echo-chamber.

Defederation is not the solution to your problem. sh.itjust.works is one of the larger lemmy instances, hosting lots of users, and lots of content.

The best solution for you, if you don’t want to see sh.itjust.works/c/thedonald is to block the community. (Or the ONE USER who posts stuff in it)

You cannot defederate every instance, that hosts a community which you do not agree with or like.

(Also- unrelated- c/thedonald isn’t going places… after it breaks the fediverse record of negative downvotes, it will prob disappear soon…)

Dented-Mantle-4133,

Defederation may be the only solution to the problem without changing the source code to allow for better administration tools.

xtremeownage,

Defederation may be the only solution to the problem without changing the source code to allow for better administration tools.

Do note, posts from that community, will ONLY federate to your instance, if somebody is actively subscribed to it.

If nobody is subscribed to that community, then posts from that community WILL NOT flow to your instance.

Dented-Mantle-4133,

Interesting.

GunnarRunnar, (edited )

So if I want to spread my shit, I just need to create an account on that instance and subscribe to the community? Seems feasible and if they ban that account I (or someone else from the shit community) can create a new account and just keep going.

Overzeetop,
Overzeetop avatar

That the (unfortunate) workaround.

xtremeownage,

I mean, you would also need to make sure the posts you were trying to spread, were not -5000 in votes too. (Otherwise, I don’t think the algorithm is going to pick them up…)

cendawanita,
cendawanita avatar

@xtremeownage Downvotes do nothing here to trigger deletion or admin action.

xtremeownage,

I know, but eventually, the user posting that content should figure out- it’s not going anywhere…

Unless- there are users actively subscribing to that community.

cendawanita,
cendawanita avatar

Well...

darq,
darq avatar

That's not how fascists work.

dreadedchalupacabra,

You can and should defederate from things you don't want to see. That's the whole point of the entire project, that you can control your experience and choose to interact with whatever communities you wish. The Donald has a history of brigading and generally being a barbarian horde of racist dickheads, so defederating from them makes absolute sense. This isn't just "I don't like your opinion", it's absolutely "these people have a proven history of ruining every group they go near."

meldroc,

Absolutely! Defederation is the prime weapon against these choad warriors.

Fuck fascists, and fuck any instance which would host them!

usernotfound,

There’s probably 11 fascists on kbin as well. Should your instance by defederated too?

xtremeownage,

sh.itjust.works isn’t just c/thedonald.

Reddit, wasn’t just r/thedonald.

c/thedonald, is a SINGLE USER on an entire instance.

https://lemmyonline.com/pictrs/image/a3f22d5c-9b13-4004-8c12-e385df86aa06.png

Defederating the entire instance, to block the content of a single user, ONLY HURTS the thousands of users on that server, who want to see content elsewhere, and ONLY HURTS the users elsewhere, who want to see content on THAT server.

darq,
darq avatar

Then perhaps that instance should consider if it really wants to host the hateful content everyone is objecting to.

xtremeownage,

@Tsinc Care to share your viewpoint?

Tsinc, (edited )
@Tsinc@feddit.de avatar

They might have a main community on patriots.win, that doesn't mean they wont try to spread their ideology into other social media. I don't think TD on sh.it.just.works will be successfull, but I hoped for a wider agreement here, that racism should not be activly shared. I can block them, I can move to another instance, but what i really want is to minimize the range of this and future extreme-right communities in the lemmyverse.

I think we have the amazing new tool of a federated space to build really nice communities. Why dont we use it? The admins of sh.itjust.works have the choice. If they are in favour of nazis, we better not wait longer until they are even bigger and more difficult to defederate.

You cannot defederate every instance, that hosts a community which you do not agree with or like.

sounds to me like it's my problem to not like nazis

xtremeownage,

I don’t think anyone wants racism to spread. I mean- look at the rules for my instance for example. There aren’t many.

  1. Don’t be an asshole
  2. Don’t be racist.
  3. Don’t spam.

The only point I am trying to address here- federderating instances, is going to kill this platform MUCH faster then just letting that one, tiny echo-chamber exist.

Lets say, we block that community and ban it. The problem is solved, right?

Absolutely not!, now you are going to have a bunch of those followers attacking lemmy with a vengeance, trying to push the agenda at every single corner!

On the other side- I think it is in the best interests of the platform as a whole, to remain somewhat neutral.

Sure, we have have individual communities who prefer left-wing, or right-wing. We have have instances dedicated to being liberal or conservative.

But- at a platform level, immediately bashing out on communities because it is against another’s belief- is going to cause a lot more problems than it solves. Think about it, do you honestly thing the_donald would have ever existed if the tension from reddit didn’t cause them to form their own echo chamber?

(Also- before anyone comments on my political affiliation- I am libertarian. I do not give a rats ass who you vote for, and I openly support your choice and right to vote how you choose.)

BaldManGoomba,

Yes. Fox News wasn't right wing and fascist enough. So they created OAN. They are willing to make there own thing to make layers of deeper circles. Fox News is a pipeline to OAN but ever since OAN was banned from most services the alt right was quieted until other pipelines funneled them to the derangement. Each subsequent deeper circle gets less reach when you kill the pipelines.

It is the paradox of tolerance. You can be welcoming to everyone with the same ideologues of tolerance that is the social contract of an open and welcoming society. But as soon as a rat comes in trying to spread intolerance and hate you must sever them out and cut them out to stop the spread. If you don't want racists purge them as soon as possible and don't let them get footing in the community. If you don't want assholes kick them out. Making a secondary account after they change their mind and want to be apart of a welcoming society is easy. But purging people who have infiltrated the highest parts of society after deciding you had enough is impossible.

JasSmith,

I think you're a Nazi and you should be banned from lemmy.ml. Only a Nazi would be in favour of banning free speech and political opponents. Now what? How is this supposed to end?

jalda,
jalda avatar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

Orez66,

You're actually smooth brained for this

BraveSirZaphod,
BraveSirZaphod avatar

How is this supposed to end?

It ends with the recognition that truth is a thing that exists, facts are real, and while there is plenty of room for debate, some things fall outside of that. That the Holocaust happened is not something we get to have an Opinion™ on. And while we can absolutely have a conversation about where that line should be, most people recognize that there should be a line, and if the goal is to create a generally pleasant online space, the line should probably be higher than "literally criminal".

I often see this idea pushed that, because some topics are controversial and politics is messy, it is impossible to actually label anything as true and all opinions are thus equally valid and should be respected. This is, quite simply, wrong. "I think you're the real Nazi" is only a plausible response if you pretend that Nazi is a genetical word for "person I disagree with" rather than a real term with actual meaning that either does or does not describe something.

VoxAdActa, (edited )
VoxAdActa avatar

And over here, we have the Drama-Bitch habitat. If you listen carefully, you can hear its over-exaggerated mating call. This species is interesting because it evolved a unique vision mechanism: it can only see the world in extreme shades of white and black. Scientists currently think this is due to generations of inbreeding. When threatened with any kind of nuance, it resorts to the loud braying from which it gets its name; an overdramatic lament of how the world will turn into a literal hellscape if it doesn't get its way. It's incapable of understanding how absurd it sounds, and insists on being taken seriously, even though its wailings are too idiotic to even begin to engage with.

HEY! SIR! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, DON'T TAP ON THE GLASS! You get it started and it'll disappear into its pillow fort and scream literally all day long!

Moving on....

Zorque,

Their speech is not free, we all pay by having to put up with their bullshit. Even if its metaphorically sticking our fingers in our ears anytime they're nearby.

CynAq,
CynAq avatar

I just preemptively blocked the community for my account. I'd recommend everyone do the same until, and if they prove to be a problem.
I think instead of calling for pre-blocks or defederation of entire instances, we have to be vigilant and keep a close eye on the discussions going on around us.

I'm saying this not because I'm an "enlightened centrist" living in a delusion of tolerance or a fascist in disguise. I am as left leaning, antifascist, and antiauthoritarian as they get. I'm just saying this as I know from experience that there's no real way to eliminate people with bigoted views from our communities other than on an individual basis.

Ban an entire instance, you'll still have to block the individuals if they come one by one to stir shit up on your turf. Just skip the first part and go for the individual communities and users. They will simply find each other and form groups, as instances or otherwise anyway.

I know it's not ideal, but there's no real way to prevent these fascist groups from forming anywhere there's a large enough number of people. We can only block our own interaction with them and form counter groups, and actively fight against their bigotry.

I believe this is the sad truth we all have to live with, at least for the time being, because I can't see defederation as an effective tool.

Hawne,
Hawne avatar

Totally agreeing. I remember of my BBS and Usenet days and we're facing a somewhat similar situation: in a distributed architecture we will be dealing with unsavory individuals and communities. We definitely will.

I was talking about this exact situation the other day with a reddit-migrant (net)friend of mine. We were debating on how and where to move the (somewhat important) France subreddit, as for now the most populated French community in the verse is hosted on an instance relaying lemmygrad - which raises some concern.

Well, I talked to him about the UN. Sorry to get a bit pseudo-political here but I think you'll get the idea.

The comparison I used is that while it is quite irritating (at the moment, but not only) that Russia is sitting at the security council, it is still a good thing that it is still a member of the UN. Because what matters in the end is that we all can discuss issues and overcome conflicts in order to keep on living all together.

And here in the fediverse we don't even have to deal with a network-wide veto from any unsavory community. Worst case, they're sitting on their "local security council" - meaning they're ruling within their own node, but as a federation we don't have to comply if thing s get really ugly.

However in the end what matters is the federation - the UN. When talking about server-to-server or server-to-federation conflicts defederation must be the last resort, because what really matters in the end is the federation surviving. Without it we're just powerless and will soon get back to some shady reddit clone à la squabbles.

Now, to get back to these usenet days. If you remember those days we had newsgroups varying from gardening to politics, but wa also had some less civil newsgroups including cp and alike. Most of these "worst contenders" were only relayed by a few major nodes but still they made their way through Usenet because of its very distributed architecture.

People not wanting to have any interaction with those newsgroups could either connect to a node ralaying them while not downloading their headers, or they could connect to a more "safe space" node. And on the other hand people who wished to interact with those newsgroups had to connect to anode relaying them, just as simple as that.

I am convinced we're heading towards a similar architecture and situation. As the fediverse grows we definitely will encounter bad people and bad communities, and sometimes we will look as bad people or bad communities to others. This is my truth, tell me yours, that's the way it goes. And it's not really a big deal.

I'm saying it's not a big deal because in the end, with a distributed architecture, the only censorship that really matters is yours. Your own filters, your choice of either connecting instance or followed communities and individuals. Due to its very nature, in a distributed architecture you are the one setting up your own barriers. Hardware and network distribution cannot and shall not do this part of the job for you, and server-to-server defed should only be the worst-case scenario in order - for instance not to relay (and mirror) cp, and for openly bot-friendly instances.

Now mind you, am I saying there is no safe space? Well, to a certain extent. Just as in a centralized architecture each of us will make their own "nest" so to speak and will interact with the people and communities we choose. We can board a plane with a nazi without being "tainted" by its naziness and if it really unsettles us we can always ask for a separation curtain - as in, individual defederation. Those are already programmed and will be available in the next versions, allowing any user to just ignore some communities even if they are relayed by their instance.

In a distributed architecture, we must all deal with this double-edged paradigm: We WILL encounter people and communities we don't like, but we do NOT HAVE TO suffer from them. Individual filters (and soon, individual defed) are here to help us establish our personal way of cherry-picking whatever this network has to offer.

This is usenet on steroids. There is no premade safe space and it shouldn't be, because what matters in the end is the network and not its junk. In a distributed architecture it's mostly up to the end user to set their own junk filters.

cendawanita,
cendawanita avatar

@CynAq you don't have to defed entire instances, if the instance themselves are willing to keep to their own principles. If that's not kept or they've changed their position, it is actually Fedi culture to date, to defed (this is on instance to instance basis). Federation isn't being connected to everyone, it's practicing the right to associate. That's why if you don't agree with your instance, unlike closed systems, you have the right/freedom to move.

(The problem is the moving so far only carries your social graph not post history. So yes there is a penalty - but this also incentivize users to also push their admins to act more representatively. Assuming that's what the majority wants)

cendawanita,
cendawanita avatar

Anyway, what does then tend to shake out is that the bigger instances need to decide if it's open for all or not, and the social consequences of that, and more small to midsized instances émerge.

imaqtpie,
imaqtpie avatar

This is a fantastic comment. Defederation just causes more problems, as counterintuitive as that seems.

The threadiverse as a whole has a great number of smart, reasonable people. I would like to believe that we can build a system that allows us to flourish and them to simply exist.

But if we can't then we always have the option

GarbageShootAlt2,

Why should they get a platform? Why should they be allowed “to simply exist”? Because the Marketplace of Ideas will sort itself out and make sure the best ideas “flourish”? I regret to inform you that the real world doesn’t work like the thought experiments of classical liberalism, and TD’s namesake is ironically a great demonstration of that.

Reactionary spaces should be stamped out.

GunnarRunnar,

What's the "more" when you defederate from problematic instances?

It's cowardice if you ban hate speech from your platform but don't moderate the content coming from other instances that aren't up to your standard. It's having your cake and eating it too.

It doesn't make sense that you don't trust your instance to moderate the content. Besides, isn't defederation public knowledge? So you can't just gaslight your instance's users willynilly, you'll be caught if you start defederating from pettiness.

crowsby,
crowsby avatar

OP may come across a little alarmist, but it's really easy for online communities to become Nazi bars if the admins aren't carefully weeding out the ne'er-do-wells. Especially in places with open signups. Taking a hands-off approach and simply hoping that everyone is going to be a mature adult and behave themselves is effectively voting to surrender the site to assholes.

And yeah, they follow "the rules", and free speech and all that, until they don't. The thing to keep in mind is that these are not folks who, as a community, are interested in engaging in good-faith discussion. They are looking for a platform to spread disinformation and troll the libz, and any platform that facilitates it is also complicit.

GarbageShootAlt2,

Actively purging communities of reactionaries is pretty important and the hands-off attitude that some Free Speech Warriors inherited from Reddit advocate for is only going to spread reaction. If they care so much about Free Speech, they can go back to their pedophile website and talk about how r/jailbait needed to be kept up for the sake of free speech.

TZUI1hRq,

If you don't like something, there is a block feature. It is good that the fediverse gains some diversity instead of staying an echochamber.

DarkThoughts,

Bigoted extremists that spread disinformation aren't contributing towards diversity.

darq,
darq avatar

Bigotry loses you diversity. You eventually lose all the people who don't want to be around people dehumanising them.

So you trade off all the diverse opinions and experiences of those people, in exchange for... what exactly?

Slartibartfast,
Slartibartfast avatar

I clicked the link so I could block it, it went to a 404. The system works!

GunnarRunnar,

Hate speech stands opposite of diversity.

silicon_reverie, (edited )
silicon_reverie avatar

In general, I agree. Diversity is a good thing, and I tend to prefer giving users tools for self-moderation rather than seeing instance admins use a blunt instrument like defederation which will inevitably have spillover consequences for communities that aren't even associated with TheDonald.

HOWEVER, this is still a good debate to have. The issue shouldn't be "allow all federation" vs "allow no federation" at the instance level, but rather "where do we draw the line?" Too lax and you've got child porn, hate speech, and weaponized disinformation. Too strict and you stifle free speech. I think we can all agree that a middle ground is the goal. So where is the line in this case?

Political communities? Great! Bring 'em on. We need an open "marketplace of ideas." But you can have a political debate without devolving into hate speech, provably false disinformation, calls to lynch politicians, and doxing. It doesn't matter if they're coming from the left or the right, death threats are not okay. That's not a political statement. It's just a fact. TheDonald has a long and sordid history on Reddit, and I doubt very much that it's even capable of staying on the right side of that line. But we should judge their Lemmy community by their moderation policy, not their history on another platform. Do they regularly allow hate speech? Death threats? Provably false disinformation? If so, that's exactly why defederation exists. Yes, there might be spillover consequences for the other communities on that instance, but if the instance mods don't have a problem with hate speech in their communities then it is an instance-wide problem that should be addressed at the instance level.

So far they're tiny and haven't done anything one way or the other. I don't think anyone should kick them out just for existing. But I do think we should talk about our community-wide lines in the sand, and then hold instances we federate with to those standards. Including TheDonald.

niktemadur,
niktemadur avatar

The meaning of Diversity certainly does NOT include "tolerating the intolerant".

These mouth-breathing worse-than-deadweights worship a grotesque wanna-be dictator who wipes the orange shit on his ass with any and every ideal of law and order, who incites violence to feed the endless void of his self-loathing.
They target minorities for harassment and violence.
They stormed the Capitol, with kidnapping and murder on their tiny insane minds, because they didn't like the results of an election they lost in a landslide.
They attempt to exploit the flexibility of free speech and democracy, to subvert and corrode it.

These sick people don't deserve a space ANYWHERE.

sour, (edited )
sour avatar

diversity shouldn't include bigots

Rhabuko, (edited )

I wouldn't de-federate sh.itjust.works for that now. But stuff like this doesn't look good and the "Just ignore it bro" crowd shows that they never had to deal with organized harassment themselves. The_Donald wasn't just a harmless sub with a little bit of trolling, it was responsible for extreme radicalization and people died because of it. The reality is that such hate groups never stay in their place and behave everywhere else. They brigade and harass every time. Should the community grow and attract more people, it's just a disaster waiting to happen. People are responsible for their own instance and are free to choose whatever they want but that's the same for other servers if they should decide to de-federate.

catshit_dogfart,

And that was indicated when they migrated to Voat. Nobody else used Voat, it was just them. Also when reddit changed their policies to prevent one sub from appearing on the front page more than once.

The whole point is to be obnoxious in spaces where it isn’t welcome. When they realized they couldn’t do that on a platform that only consisted of them, there was no incentive to engage. The whole point is to shit up a platform enjoyed by others, and that’s exactly what they’ll do here.

WhiteTiger,

Voat was about 50% fatpeoplehate, 35% T_D, and 15% 'free speech' enthusiasts. The 15% were quickly pushed out by the overwhelming amount of content generated by fatpeoplehate, but eventually they got tired of posting the same things over and over and only T_D was left.

sugar_in_your_tea,

If it develops into something that breaks the instance’s rules, it should be shut down. Until then, don’t just assume because of the name that it’s going to break the rules.

WhiteOakBayou,

Maybe you should switch to beehaw. I think they align more with your interests

Dio,
Dio avatar

Haha, you likely have a point. Judging from most of the whinging responses, a lot should consider joining beehaw.

watup,

God please just stop with your whining. Just block them and be done with it. How self-centered can you be to demand defederation just bc you can't deal with a political worldview thats different than yours? Screw you dude.

mrnotoriousman,

Always love when far right MAGA chuds call their fascist hate "different opinions" and other similar shit. We all see through your bullshit lol.

demvoter,
demvoter avatar

Nazis are not allowed a fucking platform! Saying that one race is better than another one is not a fucking “political worldview.” Jfc.

dreadedchalupacabra,

Found the Trump supporter.

ANuStart,

"political worldview"

Wasn't aware that violence and bigotry was a political world view

Go join your friends in your little safe spot at the_donald

ElleChaise,

Imagine believing hate is a valid world view... Sad.

niktemadur,
niktemadur avatar

Low energy. Losers!

PerogiBoi,
@PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca avatar

Hero worship of a con man is not a valid ideology or worldview.

aegisgfx877,
aegisgfx877 avatar

Its a cult, and cults always end the same way no matter how big they get.

Koolaide

TerabyteRex,

being racist isnt an accrptable world political view

niktemadur,
niktemadur avatar

And anybody who still attempts to normalize this as "a political worldview" - after all the vulgar and berserk shit that has kept on coming down for the past seven or eight years - is acting with malevolent motives in (their tiny little) mind.

aegisgfx877,
aegisgfx877 avatar

Racism is not open for debate, if someone is racist then they are excluded from the topics of politics and human rights. And being a racist does not give someone a personality either. The far right cannot handle those facts.

killbot_gamma,

intolerance is the cancer that kills the tolerant society. is it really that hard to say racism bad?

anjo_bebo,
anjo_bebo avatar

I know right? But but but both sides should be able to.... No the fuck they shouldn't.

daniel, (edited )

I guess racism is a worldview? As long as individuals can just never visit that dark corner of the Internet, it doesn’t need to be technically defederated, thereby not blocking other non-fascist and racist communities. (To block those communities, just visit: https://kbin.social/magazines?q=thedonald and hit the ∅ )

rist097,

I opened that community, I didn't see any racist posts

GreatBigJerk,
GreatBigJerk avatar

Support for Trump is inherently racist, homophobic, transphobic, and misogynistic.

rist097,

Not being from USA, I could not really care any less about Trump.

But your take is just insane in my opinion.

To me it seems like that the hate towards Trump is purely political, and I did not really see a strong evidence of him being that wildly racist

guyman,

Good lord. These are the people wanting to control what others see. It's insane the hoops they have to jump through to seem legitimate.

Just say, "I don't like Trump and I don't want anyone else to see support for him." You'll come across as more genuine.

Dio,
Dio avatar

No it isn't. Get your head out of the sand.

GreatBigJerk,
GreatBigJerk avatar

lol, okay

aegisgfx877,
aegisgfx877 avatar

Im just going to put this out there, if you enable any criminal to commit more crimes, then you are culpable for the crimes he commits. The same goes for supporting any political candidate who commits crimes, you are supporting those crimes as well, including all past and present and future crimes.

I have no problem with criminal who have paid their debt to society and are generally repentant of what they have done.. so once donny has done his time and publicly repents for the crimes he committed, then I'll be fine with him too and his supporters.

rist097,

Supporting Biden and Clintons also makes you complicit in crimes they committed all over the world? I have nothing against that statement, but you should really keep the same standard for everyone and not be selective.

guyman,

If you don't want to see it, you have the tools to block the community. Users should also have the ability to block entire instances. Instead of trying to push your agenda onto everyone else, maybe join an instance like beehaw that is already doing that. You'll be much more welcomed there and won't be ruining things for people who prefer to moderate themselves.

!deleted107246,

deleted_by_author

    •
    GreatBigJerk,
    GreatBigJerk avatar

    Banning white supremacy is not the same thing as making an echo chamber.

    !deleted107246,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    demvoter,
    demvoter avatar

    Deplatforming works. Don’t give any oxygen at all to fascists.

    Using a differences-in-differences approach, we show that on average the network disruptions reduced the consumption and production of hateful content, along with engagement within the network among periphery members. Members of the audience closest to the core members exhibit signs of backlash in the short term, but reduce their engagement within the network and with hateful content over time. The results suggest that strategies of targeted removals, such as leadership removal and network degradation efforts, can reduce the ability of hate organizations to successfully operate online.

    Source

    !deleted107246,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    GreatBigJerk,
    GreatBigJerk avatar

    Defederating helps because it limits their reach to a wider community. They're currently a small group because Lemmy and Kbin are new. If they're left unchecked, they will grow.

    You are never going to eliminate groups like this, but deplatforming them prevents their ability to radicalize more people.

    dreadedchalupacabra,

    I'm Jewish. They think I have secret space lasers that start forest fires. No, I don't have to "give them a space so I don't have an echo chamber", a lot of them want me dead. This isn't about politics.

    Hazzard,

    Personally, I'm subscribing to the belief that the fediverse's attribute of "true censorship is impossible" is a benefit, not a curse. Every prior example of censorship has just morphed into "advertiser palatable". Which is bad for everyone.

    More than happy to have access to instances that will take the kind of drastic action you're suggesting, access to my own "block" function, etc. Let them come.

    The fediverse will inevitably host some messed up stuff. Counting it a blessing that those people have a clear place to go to and sequester themselves off.

    So ultimately? More than happy to have an instance that agrees with this extreme anti-censorship posture. Sh.itjustworks is fine in my books. I can block the community, just like I could block subreddits on Reddit without abandoning the whole platform. Hell, even write a script to block everyone who's subscribed to the community. The power is yours now, and nobody can take that away. That's the fediverse.

    tookmyname,

    I think deleting the sub is the right call simply because it’s trying to replace a community that did enough in the past to deserve a ban on any platform.

    Tired of all the calls for defederation though.

    Cargon,

    Everyone keeps repeating that defederation should be a last resort. Fine, but we should also acknowledge that the list of resorts is very short:

    1. Server admins talk to the admins of the server hosting the offending community, in an attempt to get them to clean their house. If they don’t;
    2. Defederate.

    There really isn’t anything else for server operators to do that isn’t just letting the offending community continue unabated.

    Offloading the responsibility to individual users to block users / communities is lazy. Most of us don’t want to spend our limited time playing whack-a-mole.

    I suspect we’ll see user accounts shuffling around so that they land on a home server whose defederation policy matches their preferences.

    Landrin201,
    @Landrin201@lemmy.ml avatar

    I think instance owners need to be able to block specific communities in other instances instance-wide.

    So, if lemmy.ml wants to block c/the Donald!sh.itjust.works they should be able to block that community for all users of lemmy.ml, but not the rest of the sh.itjust works instance.

    Best of both worlds IMO

    Lols,

    this is already an option, as shitjustworks pointed out in the update post

    thoro,

    It’s not about ignoring them or not having to see the content. It’s about not providing them a platform.

    They would seep into other communities

    Lols,

    the comment i responded to explicitly was about ignoring them or not having to see the content

    ignoring that, if the one guy shitposting on TD will 'seep into other communities' literally just ban him

    if you keep suggesting defederation every single time anyone on any instance acts like an asshole, you might as well defederate from every single instance including lemmy.ml permanently

    thoro,

    My point is the issue at hand for people is an instance’s decision to host a community like The Donald. Being able to ignore them misses the point. A lot of people, possibly the majority, do not want the main Lemmy instances to platform a community like The Donald. They want a firm stance of not tolerating intolerant communities.

    This isn’t a case of “some assholes.” It’s a case of not wanting /c/fascism type communities given platforms and connecting with instances.

    Vorticity,

    You're probably right that blocking a single community should probably be an option.

    That said, if an instance is willing to allow hateful communities like TD, I expect their comment sections will be more toxic than other instances. I like the idea of defederating from instances that allow hateful communities.

    Lols,

    its 3 people

    suggesting that shitjustworks is bound to be more toxic because the modteam didnt immediately ban a shitposting community consisting of 3 people is ridiculous

    Vorticity,

    I wasn't talking about this one specific instance really. I was using it as an example while talking about the tools needed for managing federation and what a user sees.

    Lols,

    nothing about 'if an instance is willing to allow hateful communities like TD, I expect their comment sections will be more toxic' or 'i like the idea of defederating from instances that allow hateful communities' indicated that you werent actually talking about the instance currently under fire for supposedly (but not actually) allowing hateful communities like TD

    Antik,
    @Antik@lemmy.ml avatar

    If you go to your settings, you’ll see “Blocks” at the top. There you can search “donald” on the right side and you can block all three that currently exist. I just found that out a few minutes ago.

    GarbageShootAlt2,

    Nazis shouldn’t be able to do what they want on their own instances either, they should be crushed there as they should in every space

    But also blacklisting is a basic first step that everyone should do, so you aren’t wrong there.

    In defense of some instance admins, I think they can just literally not know because it’s hard to keep tabs on every instance that gets made, but that also means that, if you use that instance, you should totally DM them to let them know (I’ve had to do this with certain other instances). If the admins persistently ignore those warnings, they should be treated as complicit.

    Contextual_Idiot,

    I just don’t get it.

    Block the c/TheDonald community. That’s it. That’s all you need to do.

    When it gets no visits, no views, and only it’s handful of users meme-ing each other, it’ll die. One of the big reasons TheDonald took off on Reddit was because of all the attention it got.

    So, don’t give them attention. Don’t feed the trolls.

    I’m not saying to tolerate neo-nazis. But running from them isn’t exactly a time proven strategy, either. They will exist, and it’s up to all of us to remind them that their views are garbage.

    sugar_in_your_tea,

    Exactly. I don’t feel obligated to read all the subs on an instance, I just read the ones I’m interested in.

    meldroc,

    Defederate their asses. Fascism is a cancer.

    Anyone who's been on Reddit or Twitter knows what happens if you give those psychopaths an inch.

    Deplatforming works. That's why the chuds whine about it.

    DLSchichtl,

    Hear hear!

    Saprophyte,
    @Saprophyte@lemmy.world avatar

    If three men sit at a table with a Nazi and don't protest, there are four Nazis at the table.

    lvxferre,
    @lvxferre@lemmy.ml avatar

    I’m not informed enough on Trump to know if “Trump supporter” automatically implies “Nazi”. The r/TD community itself was cancer, I believe. Still - for the sake of the argument, let’s pretend that all Trump supporters are Nazi, and that the comm is about people genuinely supporting Trump.

    The main problem here is that you got exactly two subscribers in a rather large instance. From the PoV of other instances, to defederalise shitjustworks is the same as using a nuclear bomb to get rid of a cockroach. At least at this stage, IMO actions in other instances should be towards that community and its users, not the whole instance.

    And, within shitjustworks: if the admins have a laissez faire approach, I think that actions are up to the users.

    Also I wouldn’t generally link my own blog here, given that I use it mostly to vent, but this might be food for thought for the folks here. I think that analogies between ants in a kitchen and undesired users are specially useful: you don’t want to nuke the kitchen because of a single ant, but you don’t want to leave it do as it pleases either.

    GarbageShootAlt2,

    If the admins have a laissez faire approach, then they can go fuck themselves. The difference between a nuke and defederation (well, there are many, but the main one here) is that defederation can be undone. If the admins don’t like their instance being isolated, they can fix the problem by getting rid of the comm. If they are that committed to allowing the comm, then it is correct to keep them defederated.

    The one caveat I will give is that it would be incumbent on the other instances to follow through on overturning the blacklist – and making sure their peer instances do – if shitjustworks actually does comply eventually.

    lvxferre, (edited )
    @lvxferre@lemmy.ml avatar

    If the admins have a laissez faire approach, then they can go fuck themselves.

    Note that, by laissez faire approach, I don’t mean “do nothing at all”; that’s incompetence, and incompetent admins go fuck themselves, as you said. For me, laissez faire means “keep a close watch on the situation, and intervene if necessary, but otherwise let the userbase handle it”.

    And in this case you got a rather engaged community, who’s most likely prone to engage those Nazi, and tell them to fuck off. Is admin intervention necessary in this case?

    I’m not sure if a laissez faire approach would be a good approach in this specific case, but it’s generally a good “default” - often people managing communities cause more harm than good when they’re trying to proactively solve issues that didn’t appear yet.

    The difference between a nuke and defederation (well, there are many, but the main one here) is that defederation can be undone.

    That’s a great point - the reversibility makes the option less drastic. Still annoying for legitimate users and admins of other instances.

    GarbageShootAlt2,

    Note that, by laissez faire approach, I don’t mean “do nothing at all”; that’s incompetence, and incompetent admins go fuck themselves, as you said. For me, laissez faire means “keep a close watch on the situation, and intervene if necessary, but otherwise let the userbase handle it”.

    “If necessary” is doing all of the work there. By your meaningless definition of the word, I agree that’s a good approach, but you’re letting insinuation occupy the entire point in dispute. We both know what “laissez-faire” actually means, and I think the Gilded Age showed us what a shit approach it is.

    And in this case you got a rather engaged community, who’s most likely prone to engage those Nazi, and tell them to fuck off. Is admin intervention necessary in this case?

    Yes, it is. I am quite familiar with how these dynamics work – I followed r/cth for about a year before it was quarantined. It was probably the most-hated sub of its time outside of literal Nazi subs (remember TD was long-inactive at that point). People complained about it all over the place for a variety of reasons, both good and bad faith. With all the controversy, do you know what it never was before it got quarantined? And honestly not even before it was banned? Neutralized. The vocal hatred against it fed its growth, and the userbase was quite aware of this fact and took advantage of it actively. When it was finally banned, the slide in Reddit’s entire user culture on the popular and political subs was palpable, and that transformation took maybe a month.

    Now, unlike the Reddit admins, I won’t equivocate between TD and cth, they were not the same in a pat little horseshoe theory conception because horseshoe theory is horseshit. That said, it nonetheless stands as a glaringly obvious counter example to your flimsy market solution – as does most of Reddit’s history before that, with various places much worse than cth festering quite aggressively until the admins banned it, either for their own reasons – like cth – or external political reasons starting from jailbait to fatpeoplehate through to WatchPeopleDie.

    I’m not sure if a laissez faire approach would be a good approach in this specific case, but it’s generally a good “default” - often people managing communities cause more harm than good when they’re trying to proactively solve issues that didn’t appear yet.

    Market solutions rarely work except for the rich and their lackeys, and the people who propose relying on them without any specific evidence should be regarded with suspicion. I’ve heard these libertarian spiels a thousand times before and, well, the only mistake I’ve ever made with libertarian ideology is not having enough contempt for it – which I say having never respected it to begin with.

    That’s a great point - the reversibility makes the option less drastic. Still annoying for legitimate users and admins of other instances.

    Oh, it’s annoying is it? That’s such a shame, that it’s annoying. I’ll be sure to tell the minorities pushed out of the Nazi bar that preventative measures are possible but really should not be implemented because they would be annoying.

    Please, give a stronger tell that you don’t give a shit for the people this more gravely impacts that you acknowledge how reversible this is and yet think that it’s still too much of a hassle because it’s annoying.

    lvxferre, (edited )
    @lvxferre@lemmy.ml avatar

    Relevant details: 1) the community was removed already, so I’ll discuss the implications if it wasn’t; 2) I’ll quote things out of order; 3) there’s a TL;DR: near the end.

    By your meaningless definition of the word […]

    We both know what “laissez-faire” actually means

    By “laissez faire” I do not mean the economic approach. I was using the expression more literally; roughly “let them handle it”, or “you let do”. This is clear by context, since the topic does not revolve around macroeconomics¹ (“market” this, “market” there). Context, use it.

    The definition is not useless, as it’s also clear that we were assigning different values to the expression. Words and expressions don’t have “actual” (intrinsic, well-defined and immutable) meanings, they change per person and sometimes per utterance². Learn to handle this.

    That said: onwards I’ll call it OIAN (Only Intervene As Necessary), to avoid ambiguity, since you struggle with this sort of thing. The underlying reasoning stays the same no matter which words are used to convey it, be it laissez faire or OIAN or wug or waka-waka or gkfdshjs.

    and I think the Gilded Age showed us what a shit approach it is.

    After a quick check in Wikipedia: why do you assume that I know random historical events from random countries across the globe? I’m not from USA. Stop trying to build a digital wall, e-Trump style³.

    With that out of the way:

    “If necessary” is doing all of the work there.

    Yet another assumption: that “all the work” won’t change from instance to instance, and that you know exactly what is supposed to be.

    Under an OIAN approach, confronting a Nazi who’s “playing along” (for now) should be up to the community. If it’s OIAN for the Nazi, it’s OIAN for everyone else. Three things might happen:

    • The Nazi leaves on his own. Problem solved.
    • The Nazi starts breaking the rules of the place (including “don’t promote hate”). They do it often when confronted enough. Then admin intervention is deserved and necessary (as non-admins can’t ban.)
    • The Nazi neither leaves, nor break the local rules. He won’t be able to bring new Nazi into the table, with the community battering him.

    Under an “it’s up to the admins to tie the shoes of the baby users” approach, the admins themselves should dictate the following:

    • That Donald support = hate, thus against the rules; or
    • That wearing a clear provocative username = trolling, thus against the rules⁴;
    • etc.

    This kind of “we dictate this, we dictate that” piles up over time, leading to abuse of a strict approach. Plenty examples of that from Reddit⁵: user got a problem? “MODS, SOLVE IT FOR ME”. Mod got a problem? “ADMINS, SOLVE IT FOR ME”. It leads into powermods, rogue admins, huge lists of rules that got broken all the time (each to address a new tiny issue) and opening even more grey areas for selective enforcement. And guess what, you’re empowering the admins in detriment of the users by that.

    Yes, it is. I am quite familiar with how these dynamics work – I followed r/cth for about a year before it was quarantined. […] and that transformation took maybe a month.

    Emphasis mine - even if we disregard that this is a big “chrust me” (anecdotal evidence does not lead to meaningful conclusions - bring data or arguments, otherwise you’re just calling your reader gullible/stupid with this sort of anecdote), there’s a second issue here: it disregards that r/chapotraphouse was an already established community, full of people reinforcing each other’s behaviour. The TD @ shitjustworks however had literally one active user.

    If we got an actual gathering of people in TD @ shitjustworks, then perhaps the dynamic would be similar. Perhaps. I’m not too eager to be an assumer.

    Now, unlike the Reddit admins, I won’t equivocate between TD and cth […]

    I believe that I get what you mean by mentioning CTH - it’s an example for the dynamic. I won’t assume crap like “than u think dat TD = CTH? lol”

    If I had to take a guess, I think that the admins in Reddit didn’t really equate TD=CTH. They banned CTH to throw a bone to the right-wing users, because they still wanted those users in their platform; they just didn’t want that content due to the advertisers not liking it. That should not happen in the Lemmyverse, as those users themselves are undesirable.

    Oh, it’s annoying is it? That’s such a shame, that it’s annoying. I’ll be sure to tell the minorities pushed out of the Nazi bar that preventative measures are possible but really should not be implemented because they would be annoying.

    OK, now you’re just distorting what I said, for the sake of yet other three fallacies: appeal to emotion, extended analogy, and strawman.

    I’m not saying “don’t kick out the Nazi”. I’m saying “letting the users kick out the Nazi might be an option”. Is the difference clear?

    Think on the differences between the RL bar and a Lemmy instance, not just the similarities. I’ll list three for you:

    • A bar is not a collective effort. It’s a business, with a specific group of people being responsible for it. A lemmy instance however should not be seen as the admin’s business, but as a collective effort.
    • The barman likely knew far better how his clients would [not] behave towards the Nazi, to decide that the action was actually necessary, after years working there. How old is the instance in question?
    • Someone can (and should) politicise an instance to not put up with Nazi. A bar cannot politicise its customers to do the same.

    And there’s a potential fourth difference that I brushed off in the other comment, but might as well address here: given that I give as many craps about USA internal politics as I do for the Mongolian ones - for the same reason - you gotta convince me that “TD supporter → certainly a Nazi”. Otherwise we’re dealing with a heuristic, not a confirmed fact⁶.

    Please, give a stronger tell that you don’t give a shit for the people this more gravely impacts that you acknowledge how reversible this is and yet think that it’s still too much of a hassle because it’s annoying.

    Please give me a stronger tell that I’m not dealing with a context-illiterate and an assumer, who’s eager to churn out fallacies like there was no tomorrow, and eager to disingenuously (or worse, idiotically) assume words onto the others’ mouths, as you consistently did across your comment.

    Anyway, answering your request: the impact of that “community” with its sole active user posting crap there would be close to zero, even to the marginalised groups. There’s a bigger issue in his username than the community itself, as that username would be seen outside the community. The actual concern would be if the user brought others like him there. That would only happen if nobody confronted him.

    I hope that the above is already enough to show that I’m actually considering the impact on those people, when I’m saying that defederation and admin action might be unnecessary. Past that, your “prove that you aren’t guilty of siding with the ants” is irrelevant.

    TL;DR:

    The admins are not your parents. “ADMINS, I CAN’T CONFRONT THE NAZI BY MYSELF” is not support to marginalised groups, it’s to act like a Reddit baby. A kid sees the ant in the kitchen and says “MUM! I SAW AN ANT! KILL IT!”; the adult crushes it.

    Also, stop dealing with marginalised groups as if they were “fragile little things, who can’t defend themselves unless big admin patronises them”. That’s perverse incentive - you’re disempowering them. You might have “good intentions” doing so but perhaps you should pave Hell with them.

    If you don’t want to be a burden in online communities, and a fucking waste of time for the other posters, then learn how to take context into account when interpreting what others say, and stop

    Learn how to take context into account when interpreting what other people say, like a decent person would, and unlike a redditor.

    1. Nota bene: given that I follow Marxian economy I do not agree with “laissez faire economy”.
    2. I can go further than that using Pragmatics and Semantics, but it would be off-topic and… frankly I don’t think that you’re able to follow it.
    3. That’s one of the few things that I remember from that guy. It sounded so unfeasible that I don’t really know if his supporters actually backed the idea up.
    4. Note that the only active poster there had an username mocking the left.
    5. Be careful with my conclusion here - there’s an issue on the data that I’m using to back it up. Find which.
    6. The shitty consequences of dealing with people through heuristics should be rather obvious.
    GarbageShootAlt2,

    Footnotes first:

    1. It’s hilarious to imagine what kind of Marxist retains the magnitude liberal brainworms you display there. Would you like to tell me what sect you identify with? I’m just fascinated to find out, since your line of reasoning is completely against ML ideology. Are you one of Richard Wolff’s spawn, maybe?
    2. I’m sure you feel like a big boy but I’m familiar with the prescriptivism vs descriptivism debate, don’t worry
    3. What the hell are you talking about here? The Gilded Age was a ~30 year period in America following the Civil War where the government went full classical liberal on its non-regulation of the economy, which produced all the famous robber barons like JP Morgan, from which we inherit the classic image of such figures, which went on to inform basically every political cartoon ever along with the mascot of Monopoly. It spawned or popularized immensely infamous practices such as “company towns” and “scrip”, along with its own genre of literature (see Stephen Crane). It’s fine to not be educated on such matters but it’s literally the most well-known era in American history other than the Great Depression or a war (back when America’s domestic society was even culturally involved in wars).
    4. N/A
    5. Whoops, no citation, not even a name. Don’t give a shit. CTH moderated itself pretty well, the admins just hated it (and the neoliberal userbase of broader Reddit).
    6. I never called TD people Nazis. This is an irrelevant tangent, what I was talking about was the nature of reactionary cesspits in general, not Nazis specifically. I don’t care what flavor of reactionary someone is, I don’t like any of them.

    Anyway, most of your post is just listing informal fallacies and I have no interest in entertaining high-school level bullshit when it’s tediously rendered, so I’ll just pick out a few more parts:

    Just to clarify, my point of the laissez-faire comparison is not that using that term makes you a libertarian, but that it was interesting how it corresponded to the very libertarian-like ideology you expressed in your arguments. More on that later.

    even if we disregard that this is a big “chrust me” (anecdotal evidence does not lead to meaningful conclusions - bring data or arguments, otherwise you’re just calling your reader gullible/stupid with this sort of anecdote)

    It’s ridiculous to dismiss cth out of hand as an “anecdote” when it represents years of interaction on the website with what was, for a period of a bit more than a year, the largest extremist community on the website and easily, easily the most active. Treating it as a though it were a single data point equivalent to other extremist subreddits would in fact be warping the information available against what would be a reasonable representation of its magnitude. TD is the only stronger example due to how long it was active unless you want to get into the old Reddit Lore of fatpeoplehate or whatever.

    The admins are not your parents. “ADMINS, I CAN’T CONFRONT THE NAZI BY MYSELF” is not support to marginalised groups, it’s to act like a Reddit baby. A kid sees the ant in the kitchen and says “MUM! I SAW AN ANT! KILL IT!”; the adult crushes it.

    Also, stop dealing with marginalised groups as if they were “fragile little things, who can’t defend themselves unless big admin patronises them”. That’s perverse incentive - you’re disempowering them. You might have “good intentions” doing so but perhaps you should pave Hell with them.

    This – and how you talked about the Nazi bar issue before – is a strange case of equivocation that seems almost deliberately obfuscatory. If I could crush the mosquito myself, I would, but because this is a forum and I am merely a normal user, I cannot and the community cannot ban them. The admins are the only people who have that power, so the best course of action (since a poll would be open to manipulation and those fuckers at beehaw wouldn’t even blink before doing so) is to have admins use their power with the consent of the governed and for the governed to become ungovernable if the admins act unilaterally against the popular consensus.

    In a similar way, patrons running the Nazis out of the bar would be illegal on many levels. The owner is the only one who is legally protected in doing so because it is his property, so he can pick up his bat and say in so many words “Leave or I will consider you a trepasser and beat you to a pulp” where a patron would be easily charged with a crime for making such a threat. Now, could the patrons act illegally and take things in their own hands anyway? Sure, but just like the difference between real futball and a Fifa video game, breaking the law in reality is possible while breaking the rules in a “programmed space” generally isn’t. I could hypothetically strike a Nazi with a hammer, cops be damned. I cannot ban a Nazi here if the site does not give me permission, it literally just can’t be done.

    I fully support arming minority communities in real life. There is no way to smuggle a banhammer to a non-mod.

    Also, the idea that supporting minorities is “babying them” is just asinine. Sitting by as they are attacked is not an example of being an ally, and forcing them to fend for themselves in the interest of what may as well be “protecting their honor as warriors” doesn’t do shit except consign them to miserable lives of fighting in their own defense no matter how successful they are. That is why, in civil society, the main thing social minorities typically fight for are legal protections that make it so they can avoid those fights or make them easier to win! Black people in general don’t seek to repeal the 1968 Civil Rights Act because the concept of a hate crime is “patronizing” to their ability to … what? Go catch racial aggressors on their own? Fuck off with that “the Democrats are the real racists” shit. The Democrats are indeed real racists, but so are Republicans.

    By the way:

    perverse incentive

    Are you really going to tell me you’re not some kind of Hayekian? Between your general lines of reasoning, your sophomoric list of wikipedia fallacies, and turns of phrase like this, you really, really seem to be a libertarian.

    lvxferre,
    @lvxferre@lemmy.ml avatar

    It’s hilarious to imagine what kind of Marxist retains the magnitude liberal brainworms

    If you genuinely fail to spot the difference between what I said and what someone who [ipsis ungulis] “retains the magnitude liberal brainworms” would say, it means that you’re such a failure at basic reading comprehension that you can be safely ignored as noise. (There’s a second idiocy in the same excerpt, but I’ll leave for the others to catch it.)

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • lemmy@lemmy.ml
  • rosin
  • Youngstown
  • osvaldo12
  • khanakhh
  • slotface
  • tacticalgear
  • InstantRegret
  • ngwrru68w68
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • everett
  • magazineikmin
  • Durango
  • provamag3
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ethstaker
  • modclub
  • mdbf
  • cisconetworking
  • Leos
  • normalnudes
  • cubers
  • megavids
  • tester
  • anitta
  • JUstTest
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •