(not sure if this is the right community, sorry)
Hi, someone posted this on another server. I’d like to request we defederate with rammy.site and exploding-heads.com as well. I scrolled through some of their posts and comments and it’s full of ridiculous anti-left propaganda, for example a post where some liberal Florida family fleeing the state when some child protection laws got passed, implying liberals abuse children and won’t live in a state that doesn’t allow them to. Just take a look for yourself.
" Admins of Lemmy.ml please consider defederating from rammy.site it has been taken over by right wing malicious actors from exploding-heads.com and the admin is nowhere to be found.
It is imperative that you take action as soon as possible the users on rammy are using the site to spread their messages to a further audience, we must nip this in the bud. If you don’t believe me check the instance for yourself, you’ll see it dominated with bigoted right wing posts and spam communities."
Edit: So many commenters think this is about political opinions or disagreement. It’s not. If I said “Mixing bleach and ammonia is good for you” I bet some of you would call that a political disagreement.
I joined this instance because it doesn’t block/ defederate. Everyone can pick what they want to see cutting it off is stupid.
I too joined this community because it hasn’t blocked nor been blocked by any other community on Lemmy.
Is that a policy of this instance?
This is the closest thing I could find that was related, can you send me what you found?:
Any illegal activities which includes, but certainly isn’t limited to spamming, portflooding, portscanning, unauthorised connections to remote hosts and any sort of scam can really not be tolerated here. Why? Because there are many here on this system that can suffer from this sort of abuse. If you want to use SDF, you really have to care about this system and the people here. If you don’t want to care, then you really shouldn’t use this resource.
I did read the FAQ before asking this, I did not take it to mean it’s a policy of the server not to defederate.
https://sdf.org/?tutorials/social_network
SDF - The Ethical Social Network What ‘Social Network’ means to us (a history lesson)
…To the users of the SDF Public Access UNIX System, ‘SDF Social’ is based on the concepts and principles of the early Social Networks that we have always been a part of and not the highly commercialized, for-profit and ethically questionable Social Networks of the late 1990s and 2000s.
Simply put, SDF has always been about Collaboration, Non-Commercialism, Choice and Privacy.
Choice is very important here. Anyway best of luck in your endeavour whatever it is.
Also in the IRC section there’s something about “Common sense” it’s a great read. Just saying. Best regards.
I seem to interpret that differently than you. I also read the common sense section, and felt that it supported my position.
I joined this instance because I wanted to learn, collaborate, and share tech- and art-related ideas in an environment not toxic like commercial social media that has been filled with bad actors. An environment more akin to the 1990s BBS systems where tech-misfits are free to be without being subjected to hate from those pushing anti-social philosophies.
If I am reading the situation wrong, I apologize.
The reason that I am not a member at beehaw was because they were overly wrapped up in concerns such as this one. I’m here for enjoyable chats with people, not to take sides in the latest macro-politics or causes or whatever lately is stirring the pot or making the winds blow. These things are fine and some people are interested in them, but I’m turned off by the idea of an instance that is particularly identified one way or another when I am not concerned with any of that.
What I’m looking for are kind souls that share an interest in technology and an instance that was widely federated so that a wide variety of my interest groups (music, weightloss, networking, ancient Stoicism) are available. That’s why I joined here. SDF has been around a long time and many who have enjoyed its offerings have held many different opinions and yet shared this resource peacefully.
I’m particularly turned off by people that want a silo with only the right causes, only the right thinking, only the right speech.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have management and protection of against those that are unkindly trolling or actively trying to do technical damage. Ban those actually doing evil. But if people of good cheer share different views kindky as neighbors and friends, I have no problem with that and don’t want to see that roped off.
Remember the two rules of FidoNet? “Don’t be excessively annoying. Don’t be easily annoyed.” That’s all I’m saying.
ancient Stoicism
Is there modern stoicism? And if so, how is it different?
There is the English dictionary definition of stoic and stoicism with a small s character. There is also an ancient philosophy of Stoicism both ongoing and with a recent revival currently ongoing.
You’re reading the situation wrong. Go to those instances and read what’s there, it’s not about free speech, it’s active disinformation campaigns and propaganda. I would feel the same if it was extreme leftist propaganda. It’s not about creating an echo chamber. I respect the right to free speech, but that isn’t the same as allowing people a platform to systematically organize hate using falsified information. This is a situation where silence is complicity. Their instance continues to exist without us, their free speech continues, but by remaining federated we are giving them a platform.
As usual, I have typed 500 words when 50 will do, and for that I apologize.
Go to those instances and read what’s there
No, I do not care to and why would you do that? You already have determined it’s not right for you. Any alleged content problem that you have to see by going there would, if true, be a problem there. Does that make it a problem here? If I have to take extraordinary steps here to see it here, isn’t that on me? Isn’t the apparatus doing what it is supposed to be doing if I seek out a thing and find it?
The ultimate measure of freedom is the freedom to abstain. (Nobody is forcibly opting us in to reading their content.)
I’m just a regular user of SDF so these things aren’t up to me, but I would think that it would take more than “because it exists.” Defederation and Federation shouldn’t be used to signal alignment and nonalignment of expression, but for reasons of managing the network itself. A telephone company provides service to everyone and doesn’t care what you do with your phone. But, if someone is using it in a way that disrupts the network itself or others’ ability to use the network, the telephone company should act to protect the overall integrity of the network. Even then it wouldn’t silence the speech because of the speech, but because of the network.
Their instance continues to exist without us, their free speech continues, but by remaining federated we are giving them a platform.
Look, it’s one thing to be put off by someone going out of their way to affront you. It’s another to feel affronted after going out of your way to find if there is something objectionable anywhere. By that logic, since you have found something then defederation alone should not be enough, as “we are giving them a platform” still, because other people might visit there directly instead of through federation. Therefore, due to that situation, they should not have an DNS entry so you work on their Registrar to “deplatform” them. Then, because someone can connect using an IP address, their ISP should disconnect their service or else they’re providing their ISP as a platform. But as they can get another ISP in this day of mobile connectivity, you could chase down their power company, yes, because their power company is a platform – as is their landlord – as is their employer. And so on.
I remain unconvinced.
You could write 5000 words and I doubt they would change their views. Still I certainly enjoyed reading your words. Best regards.
Edit: I somehow failed to copy and paste
>No, I do not care to and why would I?No, I do not care to and why would you do that?
Let’s not be like Reddit and comment essays without reading the article. That’s why. You don’t even know what you’re arguing for if you don’t look at it.
If I have to take extraordinary steps here to see it here, isn’t that on me? Isn’t the apparatus doing what it is supposed to be doing if I seek out a thing and find it?
It’s been all over my all feed personally, maybe you just don’t pay attention to where content is coming from?
going out of your way to find if there is something objectionable anywhere
See above
because other people might visit there directly instead of through federation
See above
Therefore, due to that situation, they should not have an DNS entry so you work on their Registrar to “deplatform” them.
No, I believe the internet is the utility. Unless actual crimes are being committed, they can have their websites. The key difference here is lemmy.sdf.org is relaying the posts from its own server, and therefore participating in spreading harmful disinformation. It’s not like a telephone company that lets anyone call, it’s like a newspaper that published anyone’s articles, or a bulletin board at the library that doesn’t moderate what’s there.
No, I do not care to and why would I?
If you are going to quote me, quote me. Do not edit my quotes.
Let’s not be like Reddit and comment essays without reading the article. That’s why. You don’t even know what you’re arguing for if you don’t look at it.
Your article is the article. Your story is you read something somewhere about these sites, not from the sites. You passed it along, later checking and finding that some of the first facts were wrong (which is fine, that happens), but that you still think there were problems here. Perhaps, even bigger problems here.
I don’t need to visit any other sites to hold the principle that federation or defederation is about network management, not the views or viewpoints of the content. Not whether the content is right or wrong or factual or not, but whether it impacts the federation itself.
If I was in charge of network or systems management here, my main concern with all of this would be that rammy.site is reportedly without any moderation/administration. But I’m just a user here, and it seems that you are too. You’ve said your bit, I’ve said mine, and we both been cordial about it.
You should keep talking about this if you remain interested in it, but I’m moving on. I just wanted to voice my view that the reason I joined this instance was because it was widely federated and not involved in what was going on at beehaw.
I have no idea what’s going on at beehaw.
Specifically answering this thought…
Beehaw is the “Aspiring to be(e) a safe, friendly and diverse place.” More information is available on their site at https://beehaw.org/ but below is a summary as far as I know it.
Quoting from their main page on the right side…
We’re a collective of individuals upset with the way social media has been traditionally governed. A severe lack of moderation has led to major platforms like Facebook to turn into political machinery focused on disinformation campaigns as a way to make profit off of users.
That policy is reflected on how that instance operates. They are known to be an instance that has defederated with a very large amount of other instances due to policies that those instances have as well as other things such as allowing anyone to register for an account without account approval first. (A listing is at this link and the instances they are block are under the Bl column.)
The defederating from a place because it has open registrations means that Beehaw defederated from the largest Lemmy instances due to that (referring to lemmy.world). The concern is that open registration may let undesirable people register and they do not want to federate with an instance that would condone that. If they kept the federation intact, any users “openly registering” over there could just participate on Beehaw. Beehaw prefers that their participants are vetted by someone first.
https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/66921
As such, Beehaw’s policy is to have a more isolated instance where they only interoperate with instances which are compatible with their overall mission statement. Some users prefer that and seek them out specifically for that. Other users are turned off by such things and find other instances to host their account.
Fortunately, you are able to create an account with whatever instance you want and migrate over to that new instance. Unfortunately, your account information cannot migrate over there (since Lemmy does not support that). Still, you should have account on an instance where you feel the most comfortable and then you can subscribe to communities across the Fediverse that interest you (assuming, of course, that your instance is not blocking them or is being blocked by them).
I see nothing wrong with that, they’re their own instance and can do what they want, isn’t that the point of Lemmy?
I don’t view SDF as an org that would choose to remain federated with rammy, but I could be wrong. And if I am, I will leave and choose another instance. I chose it because it’s local, has good uptime, and has a good history on the internet.
I don’t want to create an echo chamber, so lets make sure that people I disagree with can never talk to anyone who doesn’t agree with them
Can you even read?
Maybe try making a better argument.
it’s active disinformation campaigns and propaganda.
That’s for me to decide, not for you to decide on my behalf.
Edit:
Their instance continues to exist without us, their free speech continues, but by remaining federated we are giving them a platform.
This entire ideology is bullshit and I am not interested in being on instances run by people who believe it.
Then if SDF defederates from them, leave
deleted by creator
no u
funchords, ha, we don’t know each other but we’ve bumped into each other before on reddit long ago and I remember your name and that you were in a barbershop quartet. looks like you picked a good instance as home, be well man :)
Hello again! Yes, that’s me. I’m still in a quartet! ♫ Thanks for saying hello!
You are aware that defederating from an instance won’t stop individual users from that instance joining yours?
To be honest your view on things seems far too innocent, like paradox of tolerance manifest. What you desire is something that’s fought for and fiercely defended. The rest of the internet should serve evidence for why we can’t just have nice things.
Also did you look at the instances in question yourself?
What do you think the paradox of tolerance is? The reason why I ask is because it’s commonly misunderstood, because the quote explaining it is taken out of context.
If you believe I used the term incorrectly please say so. Your phrasing comes off as you’re someone who knows a thing, and wants everyone else to know they know.
I don’t know if you used the term incorrectly or not, because I can’t read your mind. It could either mean “You are naive like the paradox of tolerance warns us about” or “You are naive like the paradox of tolerance is”.
The paradox is explicated by Karl Popper as
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise.
When quoting this, people always use the first two sentences, but leave out the third.
First case; you cannot counter (in practice i.e. having an effect) the intolerant philosophies seen on these instances using rational argument as they do not appeal to rational thought. And because of this, not despite it, public opinion allows inhumane indignities to be acted upon marginalised demographics.
Also did you look at the instances in question yourself?
No. I’m operating under the principle that anything that I have to experience by going elsewhere practically proves that it isn’t causing a problem here.
You are aware that defederating from an instance won’t stop individual users from that instance joining yours?
If defederation causes objectionable people that would otherwise leave the remaining network alone to – because they were defederated – to come here and everywhere and not leave other instances alone, then the best move from the network’s perspective is to remain federated. Right?
I seriously doubt sdf.org will defederate due to political, religious or other kind of views unless some kind of danger to its users is involved, and even then I’m pretty sure we would go to ARPA votes over it. While the instance might be recent the community behind sdf.org is ancient (I say this with my utmost respect for them ) so yea, not their first rodeo or last one. If you don’t like the views of those instances feel free to block them yourself. Best regards.
Why does everyone keep thinking this is about political views?
Maybe because of the literal content of your post?
I scrolled through some of their posts and comments and it’s full of ridiculous anti-left propaganda, for example a post where some liberal Florida family fleeing the state when some child protection laws got passed, implying liberals abuse children and won’t live in a state that doesn’t allow them to.
I’ve got news for you: the entire planet has not taken up American political idiocy. Nobody outside of the USA (and many of the people in it) gives a fuck about American political slapfights.
If you want a safe space instance for one or another American “team,” find it somewhere else or start one yourself.
It’s not about politics. It’s about hate.
And I hate the hate!
Because most of the time people who cry about being forced to see things they don’t like are crying about a political topic. You can control what you block yourself. Don’t drag the rest of us into your own echo chamber.
Please don’t! The whole reason I made an account here is because they don’t defederate. I want to control what I read. If you have a problem with a certain instance or user, block them yourself! It’s very easy.
I don’t want to have to spin up a whole instance just for myself.
I decided to see for myself so I could voice an informed opinion. One of the first posts I saw on their (EH) Local channel, titled Based Pride Month, is an image of a headline reading, Saudi Arabia Celebrate Pride Month by Hanging Gays with Rainbow Noose. This is hateful content. My ability to discern such has nothing to do with savvy. I don’t want to see these opinions because they are grotesque.
However, I haven’t seen ExHeads leaking out into the greater Lemmiverse. That said, I want nothing to do with anyone who considers this ok. Even if they are currently fairly contained, they have made it clear who they are and I choose not to surround myself with bigots.
I vote to defederate. We don’t need to wait for them to become a huge pain in the ass. They are showing us who they are.
So, why don’t you block it yourself? Why are you making that decision for others?
How do you block an instance?
I just block whole communities. I’ve blocked most of the shitpost communities and now my feed is clean. Plus, I just stich to “subscribed” feed most of the time. It’s really easy to not see things you don’t like.
Yeah I’d certainly like to know as well
What do you think a federation is? If you don’t like the decisions of an instance you go to another one. If this instance defederates from rammy.site I’m staying, if not I’m leaving. You’re free to leave if they defederate too, and if you felt the need to leave because of it I’d be happy to have you gone.
I simply don’t understand what you gain by asking someone else to block content for you when you could simply do it yourself. You get all the benefits of not seeing the content you don’t like without imposing your will onto others.
It’s not about blocking content from my feed, it’s about the instance not relaying that content. Maybe you would feel differently if it was child porn?
Yes. I would feel different if it was child porn. However, that is completely irrelevant because that crosses a legal line. So far your only argument is that there’s content there you don’t like. Not that there’s something there that is equivalent to child pornography. Be genuine with your arguments.
I never argued there is content I don’t like (although I guess that’s implied, I don’t like it. But I also don’t like child porn?). Some of it actually is illegal, free speech has exceptions in the jurisdiction of SDF, but regardless of whether or not you believe that, I don’t understand why anyone would want to remain federated with an unmoderated instance.
If you don’t like the decisions of an instance you go to another one. If this instance defederates from rammy.site I’m staying, if not I’m leaving. You’re free to leave if they defederate too, and if you felt the need to leave because of it I’d be happy to have you gone.
Please stop drawing the process out and find somewhere better suited to your preferences.
Take your own advice and block me so you don’t see this post?
I can block users or communities but I don’t think there’s a way to block instances.
There are some tricks you can do with uBlock, which I’ve done, but that doesn’t help on apps.
I hope this feature gets added to Lemmy at some point.
So, the effect of “blocking an instance” is that you’d be blocking all users from that instance? Seems like a useful feature.
What I had in mind was only to block posts from that instance when browsing “all”. Exploding-Heads and Lemmygrad, for example, each have a lot of different communities that are all ideologically identical and it’s tedious to block each one individually.
But I like your idea even more. Blocking all users from an instance should also be possible at the user-level. This would be similar to defederation.
The Android app Connect has it. I’ve blocked a few instances, so I don’t see communities on them. I do see posts from users from those instances, but they’re collapsed by default, though I do see responses. Example:
You said it better than I was going to. Keeping truthaboutjews.ru out of grandma’s feed is one thing, but I feel like I’m savvy enough to read garbage responsibly. Maybe I’m being overconfident but there it is.
Do you have the same level of confidence in children and people who are deeply mentally ill?
If you want to read far-right trash, you can set up an account on a far-right trash server, rather than insisting that everybody else on the instance tolerates them for your convenience.
Their posts might be a harmless novelty for you but for others, they’re threats of violence and celebrations of abuse.
Do you have the same level of confidence in children and people who are deeply mentally ill?
I’m not SDF, or even that familiar with the organisation, but I would argue we shouldn’t let such people use this instance. Or grandma from my example, for that matter.
Their posts might be a harmless novelty for you but for others, they’re threats of violence and celebrations of abuse.
I never said they’re a harmless novelty to me. I don’t particularly expect to interact with these people but if I do I promise it won’t be in support of their hate, or even passive of it.
If you want to read far-right trash, you can set up an account on a far-right trash server, rather than insisting that everybody else on the instance tolerates them for your convenience.
Like people have said, you can block things for yourself.
I’m not SDF, or even that familiar with the organisation, but I would argue we shouldn’t let such people use this instance. Or grandma from my example, for that matter.
It sounds like you think it’s easy to police who can join an instance. The privacy ramifications of what you’re alluding to are troubling.
Sort of, but if you leave the door wide open you get, like, straight-up spambots, and then everyone defederates you. It’s pretty hard to make an email address without your real-life identity or something equivalent for the same reason.
Right now, finding SDF in the first place is the main barrier that’s assuring a certain sort of person is on here.
So you think grandmas and children and people with mental illness shouldn’t be allowed here, but people who call LGBT people slurs and make jokes about hanging them should be?
That’s…really not at all how SDF operates.
I’m not SDF, or even that familiar with the organisation, but I would argue we shouldn’t let such people use this instance. Or grandma from my example, for that matter.
I’m not sure that this approach is in-line with the org’s stated mission.
Oh, okay.
In case that read as an ageist thing, it’s not, there’s plenty of equally dumb 20-somethings. It might be elitist, I guess I have to own that.
This instance is run by a 501© non-profit and their stated mission is:
Our mission is to provide remotely accessible computing facilities for the advancement of public education, cultural enrichment, scientific research and recreation. Members can interact electronically with each other regardless of their location using passive or interactive forums. Further purposes include the recreational exchange of information concerning the Liberal and Fine Arts.
I didn’t necessarily take your statement to be ageist. However, considering the above, excluding those who may not have strong critical reasoning skills or understanding of the Internet really seems contradictory.
A 501© also has to steer clear of politics, at least on paper, which could be an issue here. It’s odd that I know that as a non-American.
I never said they’re a harmless novelty to me. I don’t particularly expect to interact with these people but if I do I promise it won’t be in support of their hate, or even passive of it.
“Let’s just give them free reign and leave the people they’re trying to bully into suicide block them” sounds pretty passive to me.
Like people have said, you can block things for yourself.
Something people have been able to do on every platform the far-right have built a little rat nest on.
Looking at the last 5 years, do you feel that strategy has been effective?
Well, you’re being true to you name, but I guess I’d question if your approach has been effective. We could make a walled garden, but that’s just [insert big platform] again and we all know where that goes.
“But hate is different!” well yeah it is, but walled garden is bad and semi-walled garden has proved unstable. By federating we’ve accepted that people will use the fediverse for whatever; defederating from something as a political tool effects only people on this small instance with highly mobile users such as myself, which is useless. If it was a bigger instance maybe you would be right.
Of course, I’m basically a guest here, so I have to temper my opinions even on that, and you’re not even on this instance. It seems like there’s some free speech absolutists here so maybe I’m wasting my breath.
Edit: And I think federation is still different from 4chan or similar. It’s not open, maybe it’s a movable-wall garden. I’d gladly wall off these people but I paradoxically don’t want to be walled off from them, and an SDF defederation fails on both counts.
You aren’t even a user of SDF Lemmy. So why are you spamming everyone here with your irrelevant opinions?
Sounds like you’ll hate the work exploding-heads do then. Better defederate.
Do you have the same level of confidence in children and people who are deeply mentally ill?
This instance, which you are not a member of, is for adults who can decide what they want to read for themselves.
Maybe you should stick to discussing issues about the instance you’re actually on, instead of wasting people’s time in discussions which don’t involve you.
Don’t worry, you’re the smartest adult in the room so if my comments are upsetting you, just don’t read them.
It’s fascinating that this solution of yours is apparently only for other people reading far-right extremism.
Imo deferderating should be a last resort. And so far I haven’t seen any excessive cases of people coming over and breaking the rules of this instance.
Yep, exploding heads is a cesspool.
I’m not in favor of defederating over political preference at all. I don’t come to this instance expecting an echo chamber, and an echo chamber is precisely what I do not want.
It’s not political difference, it’s disinformation and propaganda. Just look, even if you’re conservative you should be able to see how messed up it is unless you lack critical thinking skills
lemmygrad.ml is also full of propaganda and nobody seems to be trying to defederate it.
lemmygrad is actually pretty far up the rankings in the defederated-by stats I saw a couple weeks ago 😅
What’s posted on politics at lemme.world is “disinformation and propaganda” to me.
Just because you don’t like something, don’t deprive other rational people of ability to engage with it. This is what killed reddit and it seems that largest Lemmy instances are going down that path too.
If you’re a rational person, you would see the difference in magnitude between what’s posted on lemmy.world and rammy.site
No defederation, unless they’re breaking the law. Saying something you don’t like is not breaking the law. Grow up.
Whether people have a right to exist or have basic human rights is not political preference. And disinformation is in direct conflict with free and open knowledge and learning.
Maybe I should have removed the word “conservative” in my post. Oh wait, I didn’t use the word conservative. This isn’t political, but if you took it to be political, that would imply to me that you consider spreading false information to be part of the conservative platform.
Or maybe it’s because the instance and content the entire discussion is about is clearly republican/conservative propaganda disinformation?
Why does that make it political? If it was liberal disinformation and propaganda, or communist disinformation and propaganda, or Russian state sponsored disinformation and propaganda, it’s still not a political choice.
Acting like this is political just seems like a guise to say “no I support this propaganda and disinformation campaign so let me call it political speech instead of what it is”
Dude, just quit. You clearly have a political bias. You’re trying to play semantics and you look like a fucking idiot. You’re a fragile liberal and that’s okay. Quit with your natural authoritarian urge to suppress shit for everyone else. Block the shit you don’t want to see and leave everyone else alone to make their own decisions.
Disinformation is contrary to the stated mission of SDF. The request is no more political than the SDF organization itself.
Same
Yes, please. I’m very much in favor of this, too.
deleted by creator
Doubt it, if they believe the stuff on those servers they’re convinced everything else is the propaganda
I don’t like right wingers either but I do not believe that suppressing speech helps anyone (unless people start doxxing, swatting, dogpiling, etc) but I just went to check out exploding-heads and the first I saw was this clip of a Pfizer representative admitting that their employees got a different COVID vaccine in a senate hearing. I mean, can someone debunk that? Is it just taken out of context? Is the video doctored? Is this “fake news”? If so, provide data and sources. If you suppress something like this you’re not doing anyone a favor.
And now that almost 80% of the population are vaccinated anyways, the “vaccination hesitancy” argument doesn’t really hold value.
Just went through some other posts there and I don’t agree with a lot of their takes. Reading their rules I see no reason to defederate.
Thank you for actually reading some posts instead of blindly assuming things. I think the situation is a little different than I thought. Lemmy.ml defederated from rammy.site but not exploding-heads. rammy.site has no mods currently and a disinformation campaign was launched on it from exploding-heads. I went to look at exploding-heads again today and it seems much more mild than yesterday, but rammy.site is still filled with trash posted from exploding-heads. Maybe take a look there?
I didn’t see the vaccine post you mentioned, but I would imagine it’s out of context. I can’t even seem to find it when searching.
Context matters though. If employees got a different vaccine because the company didn’t trust their own, that’s very different than employees got a different vaccine because it was cheaper. I don’t know what the truth is there, but disinformation often involves using true facts out of context to steer towards false conclusions. It’s very easy to manipulate people that way.
Since you asked me to provide some examples myself:
https://rammy.site/post/327957
https://rammy.site/post/327922 Out of context, this implies children get transition operations from the NHS. In context, “For the first time, it has set a minimum age of seven for referral to the gender identity clinics. These children will be offered psychological support and therapy that will focus on issues that may have led to their feelings about their gender.”
https://rammy.site/post/326293
https://rammy.site/post/326298 This one is a list of cherry picked climate change predictions that didn’t come true. The vast majority of the scientific community did not come to those conclusions. In fact, I started to get the feeling they were made up, so I started checking the sources. They are actually, literally made up. They didn’t even go through the effort of finding real predictions that went wrong, they just grabbed random quotes and paired them with institutions and dates. When you search the quotes on Google, you get different names, or just the same article copied and pasted.
https://rammy.site/post/327918 This one says a woman was denied cancer treatment for criticizing transgenderism. She was not. She refused to make appointments because there was a pride flag in the office, and harassed the staff over it for years. I don’t even like Newsweek as a source, but even they told the truth on this one https://www.newsweek.com/woman-accuses-hospital-denying-cancer-treatment-over-transphobic-comment-1817671
These were five out of the first 8 posts I clicked on. I didn’t even need to try to find them.
Another example from c/all: Transphobic posts reposted from EH to rammy. Not ok. https://exploding-heads.com/post/630674
deleted by creator
removed by mod
You can take your bad faith “just asking questions” elsewhere.
Except you’re not just asking questions, you have a motive behind those questions. You aren’t just trying to learn you’re trying to invalidate somebody else because you yourself don’t believe them to be valid.
Oh and the “studentphobic” analogy about college students drinking too much is a blatant strawman argument.
Even if Pfizer employees got a different vaccine—so what? Is the implication that their employees got the good version while everybody else got the Bill-Gates-microchip-zombie version?
I think it’s more likely that the employees got first crack at it. So, they got version 1.0 before the release date, some mods were made, and the general public got version 1.5. Big deal. It only looks nefarious if you believe that Pfizer is conspiring to poison people or something.
Could we tone down the rhetoric? Why does everything have to be Bill Gates/Microchip/killshot-whatever maximum? They had to produce a shitload of vials in a short time under extreme pressure. This leads to mistakes, bad handling, good and bad batches, supply chain issues, etc. Having batches that get extra testing for “people more critical to operations” wouldn’t be unthinkable. If it’s that innocent, so be it. But I want transparency and debate. We’re still living under capitalism so even if they just had 1st and 2nd class batches, I’d want to know.
Come on, man.
Wouldn’t the employees be getting the “bad batch”, then? Since it came out first?
In any case, that quote, alone, doesn’t interest me, because it doesn’t suggest malfeasance. I don’t see any reason to research this further, because all of the anti-vaccine rhetoric I’ve heard is, yes, from people who think that Bill Gates is trying to inject a microchip inside them. (Or something equally crazy.) I’ll revise that opinion when something interesting and rational comes along, but it doesn’t sound like this is.
No please, I don’t want to question my existing beliefs!
If they have anything interesting or non-hateful to say they’ll say it on another instance. The hate they spew is only on these instances because the admins are hateful.
If there is a vote I will vote to defederate and I’ll sleep perfectly well because the slippery slope fallacy is just that. If I want to see their hateful garbage I’ll sign up for an account there.
Censoring for differences in political opinion is an obvious violation of freedom of speech. If you don’t like them, censor them for yourself. Why are you advocating what others should or shouldn’t hear?
Censoring for differences in political opinion is an obvious violation of freedom of speech
Oh no yet another freeze peach fan complaining about how somehow SDF is part of the government.
Triggered by advocacy for free speech? I have seen lots of braindead clowns like you
No, simply pointing out that people who complain that private platforms censor “”“free speech”“” as if they were somehow owed it, don’t even realize who are they complaining to.
Thanks for demonstrating!
I have repeated this argument elsewhere but I can say it again. When you are running a mainstream instance, you should be obliged to uphold every dissenting voices. Otherwise you will end up effectively censoring free speech. Your argument is extremely narrow minded
I’m sorry… well, actually I’m not; I’m rather amused. Are you being serious?
Are you saying that a major provider of an open service — like, say, a hospital, or a funerary house, for the fact of being major and open, is somehow beholden to you shouting anything you want? Such as “COVID is a hoax” or “women should not have body autonomy” kind of crap?
I could believe if it SDF, or Lemmy in general, was a service of the Press. But it’s not. Heck, even if somehow Reddit closed tomorrow and SDF became the mainline Lemmy instance, it’d still not qualify as a “public plaza”, which are the only places where you are offered freeze peach protections specifically against the government (and those protections only apply to the speech, not to its consequences).
If you go to a funerary house while they are performing a service (for their consumers, mind!) and start interrupting the rites with chants about 5G Wifi toiler-flinging COIVD bats from the CCP Intelligentsia’s Social Credits dispenser, you are not being censored when you are made to stop. You’re just being shown that you’re a jackass, and being shown the door.
I have to wonder if the people staunchly against defederation at any cost ever dealt with redditors from hate subs following them around reddit from sub to sub everywhere they posted to keep screaming at them about trans women not being women, while also repeatedly reporting them to Reddits suicide bot to try to make them think about suicide. It’s not exactly the nicest online experience and I had it more than once in my time on reddit.
To me the benefit of federation includes defederation. If it was easy to just say “get rid of all the users from r/hatesub” on reddit it would have been a lot nicer. I don’t know why people are clamoring to keep hateful shit around. Go join the hateful shit instance if you want to read it so bad but I’d rather the users of an instance like that not be able to see me at all since queer people like me are who they hate so bad, and I can’t exactly block all of them.
while also repeatedly reporting them to Reddits suicide bot to try to make them think about suicide.
Whoa. That’s a lot more messed up than I realized. I had thought it more in line with the FB “poke and block” but that makes a lot more sense. That’s just…wow… I shouldn’t expect much from bad actors but that’s something that makes me that much more glad that I left Reddit.
I have only ever gotten suicide reports when I’ve defended trans people on reddit, meanwhile I get them almost every single time I’ve done that. It’s 100% transphobes hoping to make trans people think about suicide. I’m not trans or suicidal, so they’re wasting their time with me, but that’s the motivation behind it, hoping they might get someone in a dark place.
So I have to say I’m pretty on board with defederating from an instance that is full of posts that very much also want trans people eradicated.
@SDF@lemmy.sdf.org any thoughts on this?
deleted by creator
