I guess it’s tradition to post here. Some random comment somewhere netted these community and instance bans. Whoever did that doesn’t like communists

  • unfreeradical@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Instances do have their own character. Such differences are an intentional and favorable feature of the Fediverse, but also demand a basic level of consideration, for effective navigation.

    • PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      “Don’t you dare disagree with me, or I’ll get really hostile and ban you” doesn’t demand consideration or respect.

      • unfreeradical@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        I have no power to stop Lemmygrad from existing, and it is unlikely that I would find cause to advocate against its being allowed to continue existing, as long as it operates simply as a site for activity that many would recognize as protected freedoms of expression.

        Additionally, I am using an instance that is not federated with Lemmygrad. As such, my experience in the Lemmyverse is just the same as though Lemmygrad did not exist, which I find quite optimal. LIkewise, Lemmygrad users would not be receptive to my politics, as much so as I am not agreeable to its politics.

        Among the virtues of a federated design is that we may choose the experiences we prefer, against the inevitability that others will exist who prefer experiences quite different.

        • PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          All of that, I agree with. It’s fine. In the same way, I certainly believe that maga.place should be permitted to exist.

          My point was that implicitly asking people to give “consideration” in the way that you did, is asking that some level of respect be granted to people who are giving none in return. It’s the paradox of tolerance. It’s okay to shun people who are making excuses and apologetics for literal mass murder, even to laugh at them for balling up their fists and shutting their eyes tight, and insisting that you are the one who is jingoistic, hostile, counterfactual, unreasonable, and all that, if you aren’t fans of the same mass murderers they are.

          • unfreeradical@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            I meant “consideration” in the sense of reaching decisions based on awareness.

            I think you simply misinterpreted my phrasing.