this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
6 points (60.0% liked)

sdfpubnix

1319 readers
1 users here now

Fans of SDF

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

(not sure if this is the right community, sorry)

Hi, someone posted this on another server. I'd like to request we defederate with rammy.site and exploding-heads.com as well. I scrolled through some of their posts and comments and it's full of ridiculous anti-left propaganda, for example a post where some liberal Florida family fleeing the state when some child protection laws got passed, implying liberals abuse children and won't live in a state that doesn't allow them to. Just take a look for yourself.

" Admins of Lemmy.ml please consider defederating from rammy.site it has been taken over by right wing malicious actors from exploding-heads.com and the admin is nowhere to be found.

It is imperative that you take action as soon as possible the users on rammy are using the site to spread their messages to a further audience, we must nip this in the bud. If you don't believe me check the instance for yourself, you'll see it dominated with bigoted right wing posts and spam communities."

Edit: So many commenters think this is about political opinions or disagreement. It's not. If I said "Mixing bleach and ammonia is good for you" I bet some of you would call that a political disagreement.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Do you have the same level of confidence in children and people who are deeply mentally ill?

If you want to read far-right trash, you can set up an account on a far-right trash server, rather than insisting that everybody else on the instance tolerates them for your convenience.

Their posts might be a harmless novelty for you but for others, they're threats of violence and celebrations of abuse.

[–] ThorrJo@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you have the same level of confidence in children and people who are deeply mentally ill?

This instance, which you are not a member of, is for adults who can decide what they want to read for themselves.

Maybe you should stick to discussing issues about the instance you're actually on, instead of wasting people's time in discussions which don't involve you.

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Don't worry, you're the smartest adult in the room so if my comments are upsetting you, just don't read them.

It's fascinating that this solution of yours is apparently only for other people reading far-right extremism.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Do you have the same level of confidence in children and people who are deeply mentally ill?

I'm not SDF, or even that familiar with the organisation, but I would argue we shouldn't let such people use this instance. Or grandma from my example, for that matter.

Their posts might be a harmless novelty for you but for others, they’re threats of violence and celebrations of abuse.

I never said they're a harmless novelty to me. I don't particularly expect to interact with these people but if I do I promise it won't be in support of their hate, or even passive of it.

If you want to read far-right trash, you can set up an account on a far-right trash server, rather than insisting that everybody else on the instance tolerates them for your convenience.

Like people have said, you can block things for yourself.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not SDF, or even that familiar with the organisation, but I would argue we shouldn't let such people use this instance. Or grandma from my example, for that matter.

I'm not sure that this approach is in-line with the org's stated mission.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Oh, okay.

In case that read as an ageist thing, it's not, there's plenty of equally dumb 20-somethings. It might be elitist, I guess I have to own that.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This instance is run by a 501(c) non-profit and their stated mission is:

Our mission is to provide remotely accessible computing facilities for the advancement of public education, cultural enrichment, scientific research and recreation. Members can interact electronically with each other regardless of their location using passive or interactive forums. Further purposes include the recreational exchange of information concerning the Liberal and Fine Arts.

I didn't necessarily take your statement to be ageist. However, considering the above, excluding those who may not have strong critical reasoning skills or understanding of the Internet really seems contradictory.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A 501© also has to steer clear of politics, at least on paper, which could be an issue here. It's odd that I know that as a non-American.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And neither hate speech nor speech aimed at inciting or celebrating violence against minority groups are considered protected, political speech. So, I would see that as a moot point. If it were a case of "we should de-federate because these are instances where policies are discussed that I disagree with", you might have a point in that.

However, that's clearly not the case. It took less than a minute, not searching, to find content from these instances that is using falsified information to demonize and foment hatred against those in the LGBTQ+, including communities dedicated to that purpose. Human rights and whether all deserve them is not a political topic, despite being made central to some political parties' platforms. It is one of basic human dignity and ethics.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

In a similar vein, in Canada promotion of hate is written in as an exception to freedom of expression in the Charter and criminalised (although that's not very often enforced).

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m not SDF, or even that familiar with the organisation, but I would argue we shouldn’t let such people use this instance. Or grandma from my example, for that matter.

It sounds like you think it's easy to police who can join an instance. The privacy ramifications of what you're alluding to are troubling.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sort of, but if you leave the door wide open you get, like, straight-up spambots, and then everyone defederates you. It's pretty hard to make an email address without your real-life identity or something equivalent for the same reason.

Right now, finding SDF in the first place is the main barrier that's assuring a certain sort of person is on here.

[–] lori@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 1 year ago

So you think grandmas and children and people with mental illness shouldn't be allowed here, but people who call LGBT people slurs and make jokes about hanging them should be?

That's...really not at all how SDF operates.

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I never said they're a harmless novelty to me. I don't particularly expect to interact with these people but if I do I promise it won't be in support of their hate, or even passive of it.

"Let's just give them free reign and leave the people they're trying to bully into suicide block them" sounds pretty passive to me.

Like people have said, you can block things for yourself.

Something people have been able to do on every platform the far-right have built a little rat nest on.

Looking at the last 5 years, do you feel that strategy has been effective?

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well, you're being true to you name, but I guess I'd question if your approach has been effective. We could make a walled garden, but that's just [insert big platform] again and we all know where that goes.

"But hate is different!" well yeah it is, but walled garden is bad and semi-walled garden has proved unstable. By federating we've accepted that people will use the fediverse for whatever; defederating from something as a political tool effects only people on this small instance with highly mobile users such as myself, which is useless. If it was a bigger instance maybe you would be right.

Of course, I'm basically a guest here, so I have to temper my opinions even on that, and you're not even on this instance. It seems like there's some free speech absolutists here so maybe I'm wasting my breath.

Edit: And I think federation is still different from 4chan or similar. It's not open, maybe it's a movable-wall garden. I'd gladly wall off these people but I paradoxically don't want to be walled off from them, and an SDF defederation fails on both counts.

[–] ThorrJo@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You aren't even a user of SDF Lemmy. So why are you spamming everyone here with your irrelevant opinions?

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Sounds like you'll hate the work exploding-heads do then. Better defederate.