Lately I see a lot of calls do have specific instances defederated for a particular subset of reasons:

  • Don’t like their content
  • Dont like their political leaning
  • Dont like their free speech approach
  • General feeling of being offended
  • I want a safe space!
  • This instance if hurting vulnerable people

I personally find each and every one of these arguments invalid. Everybody has the right to live in an echo chamber, but mandating it for everyone else is something that goes a bit too far.

Has humanity really developed into a situation where words and thoughts are more hurtful than sticks and stones?

Edit: Original context https://slrpnk.net/post/554148

Controversial topic, feel free to discuss!

  • MoreIronOre@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    You may have freedom of speech, but I also have the freedom to not listen to you.

    • Matt Payne
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right, you can block me. But that’s different from denying other people from reading me, and denying me from reading other people.

      Also, I’m not the one saying problematic stuff. I’m not afraid of being censored. I’m afraid of being denied access to censored material.

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

        You’re not being denied access to censored material, you’re (mildly) suffering from a lack of access to some material from some locations. I could spin up an instance tomorrow that only federates with platforms that limit their discussion to expired gift cards, and that in no way reduces your access to platforms that (for some reason?) discuss other things, like ‘unexpired’ gift cards (why would anyone bother discussing those? who the hell knows?).

        You seem to be confused by the popularity and open access of an instance to mean that it should or must be some democratic, freedom of speech led unmoderated landscape or it isn’t a legitimate platform and shouldn’t exist lest it ‘trick’ someone into thinking it is something it is not. You think because a forum ‘can’ federate with any other group, it ‘must’ federate with ‘all’ other groups, and that is simply not the case.

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

          No I’m saying I’d like it to federate with others, while other people are saying they’d prefer not to. I’ll debate federation, I won’t debate whether I should debate federation.

          To “spin up an instance” is not a reasonable solution. To argue generally (across platforms) for the merit of federation is what I’ll cheerfully continue to do because it’s a good and healthy way to engage with people about this exciting new technology.

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

        One server defederating from another is not a case of denying you from reading other people. You have the ability to join another server or make your own. You can even view content without an account. If I invited you into my house and you asked to watch a show on Netflix and I deny you, I am not preventing you from watching Netflix. I’m just not putting it on in my house. You can go home and watch Netflix.

        The great thing about Lemmy and the rest of the Fediverse is not that they are all federated, but that you can find a server that blocks what you don’t want to see. You can also create your own server for that purpose.