Flawed logic. Saying the dev will ban random things he doesn’t like is wrong since it ignores the fact he’s only disallowing something we’re all agree it’s toxic and will only destroy the site at the long run.
That’s completely wrong. People agree on things we don’t want to see, like how most forums on the internet ban porn, which is not something bad but nobody wants to see that while browsing funny cat videos.
It’s called agreement of civility. This will make the site last longer.
What are you even talking about? It’s not like anyone forces you to connect to a particular instance, but IMO blocking the user from voluntarily connecting to it is unethical and the abuse of the developer’s power.
Are you not following the conversation? What was so hard to understand? This stance of “they’re taking my freedom away” is always ridiculous; as I already stated, allowing that kind of content will hurt the platform in the long run.
It’s an extremely easy decision, either prohibit that content and as a community agree it’s the only kind of stuff nobody wants to see, or blindly allow anything and see lemmy die.
The challenge I have with this is, mastodon servers should be able to ban other servers that are toxic, but once an app starts blocking the ability to connect to certain services because of political views it becomes a different beast IMO. Servers blocking other servers is maintaining community health. Applications blocking servers is censorship. Pirate servers would be next. Then porn. Then gun sites, etc. It may be slippery slope fallacy but it sets a dangerous precedent imo.
Flawed logic. Saying the dev will ban random things he doesn’t like is wrong since it ignores the fact he’s only disallowing something we’re all agree it’s toxic and will only destroy the site at the long run.
That’s developer power abuse. I don’t care about downvotes
That’s completely wrong. People agree on things we don’t want to see, like how most forums on the internet ban porn, which is not something bad but nobody wants to see that while browsing funny cat videos.
It’s called agreement of civility. This will make the site last longer.
What are you even talking about? It’s not like anyone forces you to connect to a particular instance, but IMO blocking the user from voluntarily connecting to it is unethical and the abuse of the developer’s power.
Are you not following the conversation? What was so hard to understand? This stance of “they’re taking my freedom away” is always ridiculous; as I already stated, allowing that kind of content will hurt the platform in the long run.
It’s an extremely easy decision, either prohibit that content and as a community agree it’s the only kind of stuff nobody wants to see, or blindly allow anything and see lemmy die.
Do you even know what we’re talking about? Hint: not lemmy. It’d just like if an email blocked certain domains: malicious and nothing less
Sorry I have to go now, can’t debate. LibrePlanet 2021 is starting in minutes. (Yes I am going there)
Bye
The challenge I have with this is, mastodon servers should be able to ban other servers that are toxic, but once an app starts blocking the ability to connect to certain services because of political views it becomes a different beast IMO. Servers blocking other servers is maintaining community health. Applications blocking servers is censorship. Pirate servers would be next. Then porn. Then gun sites, etc. It may be slippery slope fallacy but it sets a dangerous precedent imo.