Absolutely
this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
261 points (93.4% liked)
Asklemmy
46892 readers
809 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes. Mostly because it's difficult to view the full content without logging in, and I refuse to do that on principle. Screenshots and mirrors are fine, I just don't think we should be generating traffic to that site.
Yes. Not only from Twitter, though. Spotify gave money to Trump's inauguration. So did Google, and Amazon.
does not make any sense to ban if you dont want x link just dont open it but letting data to not flow on instance and instead using screenshot will just decrease the storage
No. Banning any kind of link is bad. People should decide themself if they want to follow a link. Extensions like the firefox extension redirector even allow to redirect to archive websites directly, to preserve sources of knowledge while avoiding the mainstream platform of the link.
Do you think Lemmy should act like Meta, which banned Pixelfed links and Mastodon instances?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Yes.
Add youtube and, facebook to that list
I think both Twitter and Musk are incredibly toxic for society, but we don't want to set that precedent. People can make their own choice whether to visit the site. At most, links to Twitter should be flagged as such.
Sooo.. after hearing what he just said at the AfD rally, I take this back. Block that cursed shit.
There are still some anti empire posts on X.
Does Musk want us to brigade his threads? I guess if it sells more Tide then probably, but I've never seen an ad on X.
what the actual fuck
Dooooo itttt!
Slippery slope of censorship. Where would it stop?
with a federated linked network of social media sites run by it's users
what if there became a Nazi ran Mastodon or pixelfed or Lemmy instance?
Was presented with this question. Lets simplify it and remove the spin.
Are you ok with your enemy using the software you've published?
I quickly answered, yes! It's open source. This must include enemies
Similar to free speech, censorship aside, if not willing to defend essholes being essholes then don't really have free speech
Linus Torvalds slipped, tossing Russian maintainers. Politicizing open source makes it open for some, but not for others.
Which is a real dilemma cuz i hate everyone equally
To answer your question, the fediverse welcomes Nazi fascists commis gays whatever running instances. If don't like the instance moderators can always jump on another instance. And instances owners do not federate with instances they don't like.
... and the world goes on just fine
The way I see it, the slippery slope that we're currently on is tolerating nazis and bigots.
... does ML still block curse words?
load more comments
(1 replies)
FFS i come here to lemmy to escape this censorship delirium. If you are just going to be "reddit at home" might as well have actual reddit
I don't think you should do this, so what makes you better than them? π€·ββοΈ [About blocking pixelfed mentions on META]
They do hate speech and we donβt want to contribute to their traffic?
What did the links do to you, and what kind of "hate speech" do they incite? Can you explain? π€
Standard right wing division stuff about migrants, or foreigners, better before phones, health and safetyβ¦stuff like that. Initially I thought I could just block them, not realising that made the problem of seeing them worse cos algorithms.
Anything from US media should be banned as well. The US created nato using a lot of high-level nazi party members. It supports nazi collaborator Banderaists in Ukraine.
Not all US media is the same. You have to look at the structure of ownership, political pressure, advertising, and income. Treating reporters differently based on their nationality is not a good precedent to set. We need a variety of perspectives from every country, including independent media such as NPR and Wikipedia, both of which are founded in the US but provide information not on just the US but also stories around the world. No superpower, whether China, Russia, or the US should get to control the narrative. The real goal is to unite the working class against all authoritarian-capitalist-oligarchical regimes. Don't feed into Russia's anti-NATO justification for the Ukraine war. Not because I'm pro-NATO. Not because I don't believe the US has a Nazi problem (I do). I just recognize crypto-Putin apologia when I see it. I hope working people in Ukraine and Russia will both be free someday from the influence of superpowers, dictators, and billionaires.
Fuck no, great way to alienate yourselves, stifle platform growth and decrease content/engagement