Here is the thread of theirs

I have been looking through a long thread on another instance where a few users have been trying to convince that instance to defederate from Exploding Heads - because they do not want to see the content posted on Exploding Heads.

I have thought long and hard about how to please these people. They do have the option to individually block Exploding Heads communities or users, but they either do not know how to or simply do not want to.

In the end I realized if I ban those specific users requesting defederation from Exploding Heads - they will not see any content from Exploding Heads and therefore will not be offended by it. (Truth be told I am not sure if some of these users have really visited our site or interacted with our users).

So today I have banned those users with the explanation that they have said they do not want to see Exploding Heads content. If any of those users wish to be unbanned in the future, all they have to do is say so and I will happily unban them.

These users are not being banned in order to censor them, but to help them achieve what they have been requesting - to not see Exploding Heads content.

I hope you all find this a fair and reasonable action - if not let me know.

  • DarkwingDuck
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    What I am seeing is any opposition no matter how reasonable instantly gets equated to fascist/nazi/whatever and exiled. This results in the people that subscribe to these views being siloed in an echochamber themselves. I want to see good faith discussions that aren’t cut short by mods or admins because they are too intolerant of what they consider to be “intolerance”.

    • Kecessa
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And having them in an echo chamber reduces their numbers in the long run because they have less space to post their ideas and to convince others to adhere to them.

      Let’s not pretend what we can see in the screenshots in the other thread is “reasonable opposition”.

      https://sh.itjust.works/post/216888

      Good faith discussions with extremists/those who subscribe to conspiracy theories doesn’t work and all experts agree with that hence why they don’t debate them in the first place.

      • DarkwingDuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        having them in an echo chamber reduces their numbers in the long run because they have less space to post their ideas and to convince others to adhere to them

        So you literally just want to control the narrative presented to naive viewers? I thought this was universally agreed upon to be bad joojoo.

        Just let people select what they want to see themselves, out of the entirety of fediverse.

        Let’s not pretend what we can see in the screenshots in the other thread is “reasonable opposition”.

        Of course you’ll get that if you select the worst of the worst. Surely you could find innocuous conversation there as well.

        those who subscribe to conspiracy theories

        I mean, way too many non-cooky “conspiracy theories” end up being the actual truth. Some select cases in point: mass NSA spying (thanks Snowden), operation northwoods (thanks JFK), tuskegee syphilis experiments.

        Questioning authority and the narrative authority supports should be commonplace.

        • Kecessa
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          People are still free to subscribe to that instance if that’s what they want to see, taking a neutral stance towards it is still encouraging it.

          If you think you’re better than actual scientists and experts to bring arguments to convince them then by all means, create an account over there and talk them out of their delusions. We’re not a support group, we have no obligations to entertain people that want to live in a parallel reality.

          • DarkwingDuck
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If they get defederated I lose the option to subscribe to them.

            I want to have 1 fediverse account, not 10s of them.

            • Kecessa
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You can have one account over there then or on any other instances that is federated with them, I’m sure there are plenty of instances that are federated with everyone.

              • DarkwingDuck
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I started on this instance because the admin stance was to my liking. Unfortunately, he decided to let the mob rule. I need to start looking at VPS providers to run my own instance.

                • Kecessa
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  So their decision to unilaterally defederate from an instance was to your liking but now that it’s up to debate you’re not satisfied anymore?

                  How ironic.

                  • DarkwingDuck
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    No, I was against defederating tankies as well. In hindsight that was the warning.

                    If the blocklist stayed that way, so would I.

    • FlagonOfMe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I just read your whole conversation, and I understand what you are saying. I, myself, was once banned from a community for simply talking about the language people use for gender and sex, and what it all means. Anyone who knows me knows I’m really high on the tolerance spectrum, so being banned for that comment really threw me for a loop. That mod took zero time to try to figure out who I was and gave my words no charity at all. “He’s talking about the semantics of gender vs sex. Ban!” (This was reddit, and it was one of the power mods)

      It seems to me a lot of mods have a hair trigger when it comes to banning people who want to have a deeper discussion on a topic. Those who want to raise questions that might make people a little uncomfortable because they have to think. They instantly assume you’re “concern trolling” or something. Nope! I’m just a philosopher. I have questions, and I have ideas, and I like to talk about our use of language. Especially when the use of language is a major point of contention between the two sides.

      I just proofread this comment and realized that it would probably get me banned from certain liberal communities. I sound like a right-winger crying about free speech. That couldn’t be further from the truth.

      Fucking humans. We waste so much brain power trying to figure out what “side” a person is on so we know whether to hate them or not.

      That being said, nothing in the screenshots is good discussion.

      • DarkwingDuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I sound like a right-winger crying about free speech.

        That’s exactly what they would claim as the ban reason. I am way too familiar with this myself.