• @Lemvi
    link
    English
    21 year ago

    The user gives their consent the moment they sign up to a given instance. And they continue to consent for as long as they decide to use that instance rather than to switch to a different one. No one is forcing them to continue using that specific instance.

    You can call this a power imbalance, but ultimately, the admins are only as powerful as the users allow them to be. Hosting an instance does not grant an admin any power by default, rather it is earned by gaining and retaining the trust of users, and it is lost as soon as the users decide to switch to another instance.

    Or for another angle: Suppose you set up a server and allow others to use it for free. Why wouldn’t you be allowed to limit the content you host on your own server? The other users are guests, by hosting an instance you are providing them with a free service, it’s only reasonable for you to be allowed to decide on which terms you do so.

    • Masterofballs
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m saying the whole paradigm is admin centric when it should be user centric. Thats why i’ve been advocating for nostr lately. Which makes Switching instances easier.

      The problem with the fediverse is it makes it to hard to switch instances and gives to much power to admins.

      We can fix this issue by moving development over to nostr. That way if a admin bans content a user can just pull that content from another relay.

      the first step is identifying the problem. Admitting it is a problem and then talk about solutions. Mastodon allows account migrations. Which helps and lemmy should too. But it’s not good enough when admin has the power to delete a user. In nostr they cannot because they don’t have the private key.

      so I suggest lemmy add account migrations to mitigate the problem here and developers start developing and advocating solutions on nostr relays.