Did the admins poll the community about it? Why was such measure so needed? If the tankie content is so annoying why not let users decide what they want to see or not and what they want to block?

I don’t like that the admins want to censor the content I can view or not. You guys are not protecting us nor doing us a favor, you’re imposing your views over everyone else by limiting the information we are able to receive.

I don’t support the devs views or the views in lemmygrad, but this is a dangerous precedent.

I’ve read several of the “arguments” for blocking the instance and all I can see is a bunch of people talking about politics and arguing about “floods in the frontpage”. Well, let the user block communities if that’s the case, same way I’m already blocking communities I’m not interested.

I think the admins want to feel like Facebook moderation. I’d be OK with it if any instance repeatedly generated spam, security, doxxing or any other concern that couldn’t be solved by banning individuals, otherwise it’s just plain censorship.

I just don’t want the admins to use their power to decide what I can see or not. If this is going to be like this, I’ll leave for a better instance because I can see where this is going to.

  • icy@sh.itjust.worksOPEnglish
    12·
    2 years ago

    Thanks for your answer.

    I understand, I assume it was during all that backlash against Lemmy and the devs, when even r/LemmyMigration mods created r/KbinMigration and closed that one due to the devs political affiliation and moderation policy.

    Lemmygrad doesn’t seem to be a very friendly instance unless you have those specific political loyalties, and it seems self-isolating as well to an extent, I just want to foster a culture of not letting anyone control what you see or what you can say, and also a culture of accountability and feedback. I just think thats what makes communities alive and good.

    I understand (and it’s something kind of ingrained in the Lemmy logic itself) this idea that you have to just join an instance taking into account things like politics. But I like the idea of having more neutral spaces, for example if you see why some users like your instance, they perceive it as an “apolitical”, “chill” place with a good technical leadership.

    As you say it’s a personal conviction, maybe you thought your own instance should reflect your values and not federate with those that you don’t like. But right now, don’t you think that essentially mean limiting the access to the information? It’s not “big deal”, yes, they can create another account, but why? Why is it so needed?

    I think you could perfectly run the instance and let everybody block what they don’t want to see, and moderate on individual basis until circumstances require otherwise.

    • God@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      17·
      2 years ago

      I agree with the first part of your text. Not the last. Neutrality is a political position. Choosing to ignore genocide denial and to federate with an instance filled with known trolls that use bad faith arguments to try and affect discussions, and not only that but a disproportionately big community at that such as lemmygrad.ml since they were among the first ones here… I feel that neutrality in this case is support for them as they will not be fair in their attack, and unfair fights are uphill fights. I see no need to introduce this kind of trouble here.

    • Oni_eyes@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      2·
      2 years ago

      “Lemmygrad doesn’t seem to be a very friendly instance unless you have those specific political loyalties, and it seems self-isolating as well to an extent, I just want to foster a culture of not letting anyone control what you see or what you can say, and also a culture of accountability and feedback. I just think thats what makes communities alive and good.”

      So do that. Create your own instance. Here you’re just complaining that the people in this instance don’t have the same opinion towards fostering open lines with asshats.