I’m tired of supporting instances that support that trash. Are there any suggestions or even a good up-to-date list available?
I’m tired of supporting instances that support that trash. Are there any suggestions or even a good up-to-date list available?
Yes, censorship is important for some topics, for example Zionists should not be able to spread their opinions. Neither should racists or sexists. Sure, you can disagree with that, but that’d be pretty wack.
I’m glad we can agree that .ml is pro-censorship!
That wasn’t the issue that was being discussed, but sure, I’m happy that my instance censors fascist scum. You seem to have an issue with that, which seems to be a common theme with liberals.
Nah, that’s very much the issue that was being discussed - I was just dragging the discussion to absurdity in an attempt to highlight your behavior to you. Ah well. To be less subtle: You’re trying to spin this by asserting that it’s only fascists et. al that are censored, when that simply isn’t the case and has never been the claim I made. Your instance has a pattern of censoring damn near everything that disagrees - and slaps the label of zionism / fascism / liberalism on anything you dislike to justify the censorship (behavior you ape here).
It’s a game attempt to weasel your way out of having (at least tacitly) said .ml is an echo chamber, but nah, nobody is falling for it. You can baselessly dance around outright calling me a liberal all you want (lmao), but that only reinforces that the OP’s desire to find an instance that doesn’t allow your own instance’s “wack opinions” and bad faith interaction is behavior you can’t criticize without massive hypocrisy.
(edit: weird formatting issue, sorry!)
Even if your accusation were true, I’d much rather have content blocks handled on a user/post basis rather than defederating from huge instances because they supposedly contain wrongthink, like most liberal instances do.
The topic that was being discussed was your claim that lemmy.ml suppresses any dissenting opinion. You have yet to provide evidence for this claim, instead you typed up a bunch of paragraphs comparing me to two different species of animal trying to tie it all together into some kind of gotcha?
… Comparing to animals? Weasel in this case is a verb,
do you also mean “game?”(Edit: Ohhh sorry, ape. I hesitate to point this out, but that was (presumably) a 100% accurate comparison)Anyways: describing entire instances as being full of “wrongthink” is… spectacularly not a defense of the criticism here. “From my perspective the jedi are
evilliberals” is not a convincing argument. The topic has been from the start that this is a hypocritical thing to decry another user over and I’ve been very open about that - the censorship is a secondary topic used to illustrate the original point. Go look at any of the dedicated communities for evidence if you’re genuinely interested; I’m not looking to play three card montte and bailey about the tendencies of an instance with exhaustively well documented behavior you yourself serve as an example of.Reading comprehension really is in a bad state, huh? Banning an entire instance for wrongthink is what the liberal instances like lemmy.world are doing, ‘defederating’, while .ml acts on a case to case basis. Please start reading properly instead of going on these long rants.
... dude, the subject is ambiguous.
What isn’t ambiguous is that you’ve already described equivalent behavior from .ml as ‘totally fair’:
.ml censors “wrongthink”, which evidently is the majority of things found on .world and all of what’s found through piefed (unless you want to try and argue that “wack” isn’t “wrongthink”, which please do that it would be very funny). The difference between not allowing almost everything from an instance (or possibly an entire activitypub interface) because it’s “wackthink” and what the OP is requesting, blocking an instance wholesale, is pretty minor - and litigating how there minor differences in the scope of censorship don’t particularly change their impact sounds like a real waste of my time plus it’s largely beside the point. Criticizing someone else for not wanting opinions they disagree with in their ‘echo chamber’, when you’re outright admitting to (and nigh on openly advocating for) doing exactly the same thing, is hypocritical.
I mean you can tell yourself that and create insane high effort grammar analysis, or you can accept that there’s a qualitative difference between selective moderation of content that infringes on rules and defederation from huge instances and all of their content.
One is in fact totally fair and something I expect from my instances moderation, the other is ideologically motivated blanket censorship for the purpose of keeping dissenting opinions from spreading.
You still haven’t provided any proof of your accusations, you’re mostly just being annoying.