I find it a bit ironic how so many people are pointing out how "growing is important to federation" specifically in reference to this... but at the same time, beehaw are one of the few sites that are against growth (as can bee seen by their requiring to get approved in order to join their server... which IMO is no better or worse than tilde's invite requirement)... and, given the timing, it would seem that they are against hosting reddit refugees in particular.
Yes, you can claim it is for keeping beehaw's site stable or curating users or plenty of other more palatable reasons. But at the end of the day, you are still turning users away. I have a lot of respect for kbin not closing its doors to new users, despite the load it is placing on their infrastructure.
Personally, I wouldn't mind one bit if kbin/beehaw were defederated from each other (not advocating for it, just saying I wouldn't care whatsoever if it happened on its own)
You're welcome to have your own opinions. But I think actions speak louder than words
And so far, based on their actions, IMO they are being a bit elitist. They can prioritize whatever they want... But by doing so, it becomes clear that they are not interested in the users leaving reddit, so I will not pity them when those users end up elsewhere.
Then again, I am not in the "p.c. language" camp - as anyone who bothered to read my screen name can tell immediately - and am probably not in the demographic they're going for anyway.
wow, much generous. it's not "my opinion" though, it's something Beehaw's owners have stated multiple times over the past however long have I had an account there.
But I think actions speak louder than words
you mean, like an action of not prioritizing growth?
it becomes clear that they are not interested in the users leaving reddit
they're interested in forming their own community. they're not trying to become a replacement for reddit and never have.
it's not "my opinion" though, it's something Beehaw's owners have stated multiple times over the past however long have I had an account there.
Your opinion or theirs. It's obvious that you agree with it. I'm not trying to persuade you to have a different opinion. I really don't care.
I do appreciate you not hiding the fact that you are a member there.
But my point is that just because they give some rationale that sounds good at first glance, that doesn't mean that I am incorrect either.
I think any group that is restricting registration of new users - regardless of their goals or justification - is being elitist because it is restricting to only people some select few in charge deem "worthy" or in some cases, such as tildes random invite drops with extremely short time-windows, are more likely to gather users in particular time zones/regions. Maybe you dislike me using the term "elitist" for this but to my thinking, they are essentially trying to create echo chambers and are considering large segments of the Internet population as undesirables. They can put a marketing spin on that and call it "weeding out racists" or creating a safe space whatever they want but it doesn't change the underlying facts. I see plenty of sites that avoid these kind of things without resorting to such exclusionary tactics.
And if this comes across as me trying to pin that solely on beehaw, that's not my intent. I feel equally so about tildes. Again, you may disagree. That's fine. I don't care either way. I am very passionate about free speech, even for those I dislike and disagree with. And it is less that I wish to look down on beehaw/tildes/etc and more that currently, my opinion of them is that they are promoting censored communities, which is something I am opposed to. Perhaps that isn't actually the case, or maybe they will change things. My opinion isn't set in stone, and I am happy to revise it if and when new information presents itself. But as things stand now, that is how I see things.
Heh good one. Meant it more in the sense that they would probably not allow such a name there but yes, let's go with me trying to be "edgy" ;-)
Anyway, as I said in my previous comment, I am not advocating to defederate with them. But if they later get butthurt about something on kbin and decide to defederate us, I doubt that I would even spare it a thought.
Which, honestly, I respect. If you know you can't support growth then don't push for it. Huge props to Ernest for dealing appropriately with the growth of kbin.social but I also approve of Beehaw's approach - namely: we aren't ready for that kind of growth right now so we aren't going to let it happen.
I expect something similar will have to be put in place here at kbin as well sooner or later. Eventually we will run up against a limit of what Ernest can do being but a single man with but a single pair of hands.
When I first read about the defederation I had a knee jerk angry response but after thinking about it I really feel like it makes sense for them. They want to have a heavily moderated space and it's hard to do that when you integrate with the other communities. It seems to me they have a level head and are approaching this carefully. I hope that they end out being in the minority but I can understand having a few relatively solitary groups with a focused goal.
My biggest concern with this, is that it may keep many people from joining us / leaving reddit, as they also will have a knee jerk reaction, but won't bother to look any further into it.
This alyaza character seems like a real gem. I'm imagining all the curious refugees checking the place out for the first time, seeing all of this censorship irony, and promptly going straight back to reddit.
and the paragraphs and paragraphs of intentional lowercase. at least, as an admin, they seem very engaged with the community.
interesting. I wonder what this entails for sh.itjust.works? I know y'all can be a lot.... harsher than those beehaw guys. I wonder if beehaw is expecting a culture/tone shift? or just indeed actual moderating?
Yanno what? Good for them! Not only for swiftly defederating at their discretion (which I support, full stop) but also this open dialogue that is happening.
People forget that defederating can be reversed, but it requires communication and cooperation for that to be an option.
This is a good take. I find it strange that beehaw would be cast as the villains in this situation when an open line of communication exists between the admins with the tentative goal of refederating.
Great to hear that there is a dialog open between the admins. Hopefully it is all sorted swiftly. Federating with all of the large instances is important for the continued growth of the platform.
I see that in both the original post and now this update that the focus has been on improving tooling for Lemmy specifically. I'm worried that kbin isn't having the same focus on moderation tools. Anyone have some insight into kbin's roadmap?
Kbin is a newer project, the admin needs time to organize it, 2 weeks ago was just a hobby project, now it has +30k users.
I can say he is actively working on making it easier for admins and mods to regulate content.
For sure -- I just don't want kbin to get forgotten about, because it's got the exact same issues that got Lemmy.world delisted: a quickly growing userbase with open signup and limited moderation tools.
I know it's on their list, not sure where it'll get prioritized. I shared a link to kbinMeta with beehaw.org's list of needed moderation functionality, which applies to kbin as well, but so far the only comment is "jesus christ, here we go again with all this blocking bullshit". 🤣
What makes the space toxic? It just seemed like they were trying to make an inclusive space and had issues being able to moderate homophobia and anti-trans bigotry coming from these two instances and are finding alternative options. I understand why many (myself included) wouldnt like this, but I haven't seen much toxicity inside the actual instance.
Lol "anti-trans bigotry" so like I said, toxic as fuck. Those anti-*ism and anti-*phobe communities are always toxic, and not only because they typically allow and encourage certain *isms and *phobias. Oh, and socialism is the top community there, you know the deadliest ideology in modern human history.
And wow, thanks for linking to a completely random post of a singular person's negative experience with bottom surgery, you using that incredibly specific post certainly doesn't tell us what you think of trans people.
"Yeah guys it's ok to swarm someone and tell them to kill themselves for coming out about their experiences being less than perfect, we're really just soooo accepting uwuwuwuwu"
People love to find rare negative examples and signal boost them to the stars, if they don't like something. I wish people were trying harder to be the people Mr. Rogers knew they could be.
Examples like this are not rare. There is very much an unwritten rule within the trans community that you are not allowed, under any circumstance, to voice any negative experiences with transition. That's why the trans community is also so hostile towards detransitioners even attempting to take over r/detrans on Reddit.
I went to r/actual_detrans to ask for negative experiences and reasons not to have surgery before I went ahead with it. I didn't ask on r/detrans because it was TERFy AF when I went looking for possible information sources. I wouldn't have participated in a takeover effort, though. That's shitty.
Toxic positivity is real.
That having been said... Yes, rare. Detransition is rare. On a planet of multiple billions of people, yes, you can find "a lot" of people, in terms of strict numeric count, but they're a tiny fraction of all people who transition.
I didn't ask on r/detrans because it was TERFy AF when I went looking for possible information sources.
See, the community is never going to get anywhere nor gain any support if it just labels anything it doesn't like as "TERF." Yes, people in r/detrans are going to be angry, can you fucking blame them? They were lied to, groomed, and now they have to live with the after effects for the rest of their lives. I'd be pissed too if I had allowed myself to be groomed like that (which was attempted, btw).
That having been said... Yes, rare. Detransition is rare. On a planet of multiple billions of people, yes, you can find "a lot" of people, in terms of strict numeric count, but they're a tiny fraction of all people who transition.
Except this stat is highly disingenuous. For one thing it's heavily susceptible to survivorship bias (since, you know, many people that are unhappy choose the "other" method) and second off detransition is just something that's getting attention so all data on the issue will be unreliable. There's also heavy sampling bias at play, every study I've read over asks the person right after transition, during their honeymoon period, and never follows up with the person. There's also the toxic positivity that you admit exists, they could fear retaliation if they answer honestly on such a survey.
I'm not your enemy. We haven't met before now, I'm not the person or people who did any of those things to you, and dumping a bucket of rage onto me isn't going to teach them anything nor in any way improve the situation.
Second, it seems a little weird to be hostile to me, reporting about a community I found to be hostile, by saying, "Well of course they are, a community was hostile to them!" Surely you see the cyclic nature this only perpetuates.
Third, since I, you know, had a post in r/actual_detrans where I had conversations as well as participating in the community for more than a year following that, where I thought I had a contribution to make, and did so to a positive reaction locally, it's pretty clear to me that it is possible to both find that actually, you do identify more with your birth gender, and not be hostile to people who don't.
I'm sorrowful for your situation, but I didn't cause it and almost certainly had no opportunity to influence it. I don't want to be your enemy, but that is a relationship does not require two to tango. One can unilaterally decide that, and it has to be a decision on the part of those who made that decision, to revoke it.
Second, it seems a little weird to be hostile to me, reporting about a community I found to be hostile, by saying, "Well of course they are, a community was hostile to them!" Surely you see the cyclic nature this only perpetuates.
Well, if one community didn't put them in the situation to begin with maybe there'd be no anger at all? I mean, just looking at what's going on in the world both Sweden and the UK have banned puberty blockers for children and the UK is shutting down its gender clinic, the largest in the world might I add, next year for massive malpractice. Just to point out how significant that is, Sweden was at the forefront of gender therapy for minors and the UK was not far behind, so it's very very telling that they're taking these actions. So, maybe, one side of the issue is much larger than the other?
Since lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works didn't have any restrictions on making accounts they were getting a lot of trolls coming from those 2 instances so they defederated from them until the moderation tools become more advanced.
This is what all us kbinauts were thinking and a few of us asked beehaw and their response was literally "who are you? we don't even think about you" lol. so I think we're probably fine.
The community in Beehaw are all cool people, but their weird rules and heavy filtering puts me off.
Beehaw admins give me vibes of a power-hungry reddit mods or overbearing parent who thinks they know better than me.
I'll stick with other instances that allow adults to speak with adult language. I'm sick of the fucking nanny caretaker censoring bullshit that forums tend to eventually become.
That's the beautiful thing about federation though, is that as users we can choose not to subscribe and engage with communities that don't share our values.
That is ignoring that instance owners can decide for their users what instances they can and cannot engage with. Which is fine, it is their server they can manage it how they like. That is not the user deciding how to interact with other instances and communities.
I see the whole federation as a bit of a paradox. Users are allowed and encouraged to interact with other instances and communities as they please. However, if the instance a user belongs to decides to defederate from another instance. Users now have to create another account to keep interacting with that instance. Which kind of defeats the purpose of federation. Now users are forced to create an account for each instance they want to continue interacting with.
I can understand the value of making your community a more tight-knit one with a proactive stance on moderation, that's how Tildes operate and they're doing fine. The thing is I'm not sure I understand why, given this goal, Beehaw is part of the Fediverse in the first place, where there isn't much preventing someone from an outside group coming in. This sounds like a case where a centralized instance makes more sense. Maybe they're trying to see if such a community can exist on the Fediverse, in which case fair enough, but this seems like an uphill road.
They only have 4 admins and don't allow users to create communities. It's highly curated, but also can't handle the influx of users from other instances until they have better mod tools, or change their position.
100% agree, and their need for control is a huge red flag. I don't really want them federated tbh. Already they are trying to use their control over several large communities to influence other instances policies.
From my understanding, with the slew of new users on lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works, moderating comments and posts that were against Beehaw community rules (largely because of bigotry and harassment) became more or less impossible. While there has been an overall explosion in new accounts across the fediverse, almost all of their time was moderating users from those two instances. They were not able to find a compromise using the current mod tools, so went with the nuclear option while they figure out new solutions.
Yes? That's explicitly the purpose. I get it's shitty but it's pretty stupid to go to a place where they outright tell you they're going to censor you and then get mad that they do it
Yeah so I don't think we're disagreeing here then. I made the claim that they're very censor-heavy and toxic and you seem to confirm that yourself. My argument was never about specifically going over there.
Bro look at their description you can pick it up just from that. They straight up say things like "if you say bad things about feminism you're automatically sexist" like what?
Except... that's not what they say anywhere. In fact they wrote three nuanced essays that explain in detail their philosophy, and lay out that you CAN be critical of something (i.e. feminism) in a nice way that acknowledges your humanity and the humanity of others, and that if Feminists come in and flame you over it, THOSE are the people who will be getting warnings and bans. They want a mature community that fosters mutual understanding when disagreements arise. So when someone says "feminism bad" like they have a 26 character limit that doesn't exist, they see it not as disagreement but as disrespect.
Show me where they are accepting of criticism to feminism, links please, because I can source my argument. Nothing in that post encourages criticism of feminism regardless of the type of criticism. It's funny because they specifically defend modern feminism, which is something many people can find criticism of.
and that if Feminists come in and flame you over it, THOSE are the people who will be getting warnings and bans.
Yeah, for many many reasons I doubt that. If anything, the admins will allow those feminists to flame you, likely giving them a pass to violate TOS, before banning you simply for posting an article.
Yeah, for many many reasons I doubt that. If anything, the admins will allow those feminists to flame you, likely giving them a pass to violate TOS, before banning you simply for posting an article.
This still sounds like you are just guessing. Can you actually provide examples of this happening? With the moderation log being public we should be able to easily see who got banned for what.
No examples needed, we know how these people act thus this will be the case. That's assuming that someone who is even critical of feminism can get past their ideological purity tests to even get in the site.
Also, Beehaw does not seem to have public modlogs. Perhaps it's just because I am not signed in (due to not having an account) but through browsing several communities I failed to find any modlog link. Even if they do have modlogs and I am just not seeing them, do you honestly think a bunch of people who share the same ideology are going to care if mod powers are abused against someone whom they disagree with?
No examples needed, we can already observe how these people act and thus have no reason to think they'd act any differently here. Not to mention the name even alludes to a hivemind.
Good news. Im on lemmy.world but I'm sure it will work out. As there is no corporation the users and admins can collectively work on share and own the tools for moderations.
Exactly. The improved moderation tools will help everyone and there is no reason to keep it to one instance because of the non-profit nature of the fediverse (so far). Good stuff!
After you type in @the, wait for the context menu. Otherwise you need to use the URL https://example.com/u/username; you can hyperlink it using the format I showed you: text
Add comment