I saw talk of them being federated with instances like “exploding heads” (literal neo-nazis) and “posting lolis rocks”, along with having interactions from users there. Is that true? idk how to check for that, I can only just barely stumble around the normal forum interface.
If so, why? They’ve been going hard on purging communists user-by-user and comment-by-comment, which seems like a little bit of a secondary concern to nazis and pedos, especially something as simple as just blocking the instances at the very least. What’s going on over there?
What I mentioned, if it is correct, might not be exhaustive, I’m just repeating what I heard about.
Isn’t there a way for individual users to completely hide an instance from their feed? Because I would just do that if it bothers you.
I’m not saying that some posts/instances aren’t unethical, objectively incorrect, and/or dangerous, but widespread censorship is a slippery slope. If you want what you’re able to see to be heavily controlled, there are probably other instances with that purpose. An instance that describes itself as general-purpose and for everyone probably isn’t the place for that, though.
Blocking and unblocking should be normal, expected, easily discoverable, and openly discussed. There are a lot of people on the Internet; a nonzero number of them are frothing assholes; and frothing assholes are quite capable of running servers.
The whole system we’re on here is still new and in rapid flux. Expect change. This isn’t Reddit with admins saying for years that hosting /r/jailbait is essential to free speech. It takes time to develop agreeable responses to kinds of trouble this system hasn’t yet seen.
smh this is just the kind of NSFL content we’re talking about
The problem is not that some (or many) communities may block access to some (or many) other communities, but rather that such blocking is not immediately obvious and may give an appearance that those blocked communities don’t exist (kind of like lying by omission). This is especially true if the description of your community implies a lack of enforced blocking. If someone manages a community where it’s very clear that outside access is moderately to extremely controlled, I completely support that.
The point of blocking is to cause things to be invisible to the default view.
If the blocked material is put in users’ face so they know it’s blocked, that misses the point of blocking it.
Mod logs and published block lists are a great way of allowing users who are concerned about overblocking to investigate … without failing at the whole endeavor by sending every user a copy of all the horse porn & Nazi spam that got blocked.
When I ran spam filtering for an institutional email server about 20 years ago, I made the “mod logs” (or rather, SMTP envelope data of blocked messages) available to users; but they had to go to a web page to see what messages had been blocked; and the content was not visible (since the mail server had never accepted it). I wrote that code so that my users could tell me if the spam blocking I’d configured was mistakenly blocking mail they wanted to receive.
(The users were scientists & engineers. They could read email headers. If they wanted to.)
But the point of blocking the horse porn spam and Nazi froth is lost if the users have to see it anyway so they know it’s blocked.
Horse porn is not a made-up example, by the way. There was an email spammer named Jeremy Jaynes, who was in the habit of sending spam promoting bestiality porn. When he was arrested, suddenly the users on the email server I was running stopped complaining to me about horse porn.
Giant images don’t really contribute to discussions. :(
I liked them, but I think it requires more context than can be assumed. The first picture is titled “frothing fash” and the second one is an illustration of a frozen peach (“freeze peach” -> “free speech”).
I wouldn’t call blocking gore, nazis, and pedos “widespread”. For anyone who hasn’t heard the nazi bar story (source @IamRageSparkle on Twitter):
deleted by creator
Censoring literal, open Nazis and pedos is perfectly fine by me, thank you very much. I don’t think there’s any “slippery slope” involved other than the risks of allowing such people free rein in open spaces.
Keyword literal.
But nowadays people like to call Nazis other people that don’t agree with me and pedos weebs that like hs anime characters
So I agree with you if anything illegal is going on.
Are the Nazis advocating for violence and genocide and pedos distributing CP? sure block them and report them to the authorities.
But I don’t care for fictional characters that doesn’t even resemble real life humans.
Hot take I know.
There are some absurd people on this board with bad political analysis, but you can see that I edited the OP. Hopefully I didn’t offend your identitarian tendencies or whatever that toe I stepped on was.
The name of the second instance, let me remind you, is “posting.lolicon.rocks”. It seems to be run by an aggressively racist (loves to use the hard-r gamer word) pedo. Anyone who cheers what they even call lolicon is normally going to be some sort of 4chan-style sicko who probably pitched a fit at the Card Captor Sakura reboot having fewer upskirts.
Nazism, by its very nature, advocates for violence and bigotry. There are a lot of abhorrent viewpoints that are despicable before they become illegal.
Fuck them and fuck their claims and wanting free speech. That’s not even something they actually believe in.
When you get a chance could you do an AMA? I’ve never met a talking ostrich before.
To be clear, the “jailbait” forums that Reddit tolerated for years were not officially tolerating material that would be clearly illegal by US standards. If they had been, Reddit would have shut them down out of self-protection. Possessing outright child pornography is a strict-liability offense.
They were, however, posting “upskirt” photos showing children’s underwear. They were posting pictures of children at the beach in swimsuits. They were, in short, posting photos of actual children, where the photos had been selected for being sexually appealing to pedophiles.
Not drawings of fictional characters; real kids, selected for hotness to pedophiles.
I think that’s something about which site owners can very reasonably say, “Even if it is not a criminal offense, we think it’s wrong and we don’t want it on our site” without anyone needing to be concerned about censorship of ideas.
Not currently. Users can block individual communities on an instance, but only instance admins can block other instances. It would be a good feature to add though.