I consider the attitude shown by the developers here to be childish and idiotic:

Mastodon has a lot of this attitude too.

But apart from just disagreement, there's a deeper question of course: somebody can choose to run a server with (bad static word list based) censorship removed, but .. can they federate?

· · Web · 3 · 2 · 3

@waxwing Looks like they have a pre-crime department over there. ;)

@raucao @waxwing sounds like a fun job, given languages' ever evolving nature.

I prefer more old school methods of dealing with racists tbh.

@beachbardave @raucao i prefer my parents' and grandparents' generation's methods: even if i hate what you say i defend to the death, your right to say it.

@waxwing @beachbardave @raucao

The one dev has a Fidel Castro avatar. Since when did communists care about free speech?

@jcbrand @raucao @beachbardave @waxwing What if I told you that free speech is a necessary component of a successful commune?

@Zerglingman @beachbardave @raucao @waxwing

Go back in time and tell that to Fidel, I'm sure he'll be all ears.

@jcbrand @waxwing @raucao @beachbardave Funny how power corrupts, ain't it.
Even funnier is how that's communism's fault. The joke's punchline is how corruption never appears in capitalist societies.

@waxwing @raucao Do you think there is a place for Karl Popper's Tolerance Paradox?

@beachbardave @waxwing No. Tolerating is not the same as ignoring or not addressing. Policing language at the source is a totalitarian strategy by design, not one of rational adults making ethical choices.

@raucao @waxwing I agree.

However, free speech can also meet consequence... For example, the ancient law of the English Public House. "Chat shit, get banged".

Humans gonna human... (Edit) This is on a one to one basis, not on a state level.

@beachbardave @raucao about the tolerance paradox, i can't see how it applies to *speech*, it can definitely apply to actions, though.

@waxwing @raucao well you could say that Hitler never physically hurt anyone, however his speech incited some pretty awful behavior.

Clearly he wasn't a free speech advocate... but, given the right conditions, it's clear that rational arguments can fail when dealing with large numbers of disaffected people.

@beachbardave @raucao hitler's words aren't what we needed to go to war over; there's always nutcases ranting and raving. the problem was people's actions.

i have an out-of-consensus view on this: i think, e.g. that a person blatantly lying to you in a business tx should not be illegal (fraud). Not because it isn't unethical, but because laws are not the correct framework for every problem, sometimes laws cause much more harm than good. They should be used against violence, mostly.

@waxwing @raucao I'm short, I have some agreement but these are complex topics not easily discussed typing on a phone during quiet moments..

Looks like Federation with Lemmy occurs based on the values in the config file.

"allowed_instances" appears to specify the explicit list of instances to Federate with.

"blocked_instances" would then instead be used to federate with all except those explicitly added to the block list.

So I suspect your instance would be welcomed into the explicit list until someone sees a slur and deems your instance to be non-confirming and thus the admin moves your instance to the block list.

@waxwing federation doesn't have to be topologically connected. I don't see why you couldn't have federated partitions with different social norms. just need better ways to make this less confusing ui/ux wise.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
unidentified instance

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!