What, you’re scared of getting harrassed by your government for wrongthink on your hobby project? You sir are the actual fascist! We’ll defederate! Can’t let any of those instance users access ours. 🤡

And yet every self-declared pro-Zionist I’ve talked to says Zionism is just the right of the state of Israel to exist, and so being anti-Zionist is being for the destruction of the state, and being for the destruction of the state is being for the death or dispossession of every person in the state.

I think the German state is probably more inclined to interpret discussion of Zionism the way the pro-Zionists I’ve spoken to have describe the term.

I think the historical description in the text that you link is accurate, but if you’re trying to argue that Germans should be able to critique Zionism however they want because of that, it’s like literally getting into an argument about the literal meaning of literally with people who use literally to mean figuratively, but instead of a random teenager or twee linguistic descriptivist, you are arguing with the state.

What the fuck is a VPN going to do if your name is known to the web host? If you have given away personal identifying information in the purchase or maintenance of the website?

“Oh no herr officer, look at mein IP address, I am le French where such rules don’t apply. Please ignore all the other identifying information you may have gathered over the time that the website was hosted.”

Here’s how Firefox translates what I see to be the relevant parts from German to English:

“The Ministry of the Interior used a legal trick by declaring the platform not as a medium, but as an association. All investigations against allegedly involved persons, including because of the formation of a criminal association, were suspended or went into the sand. At the time, there was criticism from different sides against linksunten.indymedia.org.”

“The accused is to have published an article on the homepage of the aforementioned radio station, which contains a link of an archive of the forbidden association “left-unten.indymedia”. The association “linksunten.indymedia” was banned and dissolved with the disposition of the Federal Minister of the Interior of 14.08.2017, since the purpose and activities of the association contravened the criminal laws and was directed against constitutional order.”

I mean translations get a little funky but I’m reading this as saying that this office and two private homes were raided because someone posted a link to an archive of an indymedia website which was declared to be a criminal organization.

So here’s an article about a raid on an environmentalist group in Germany called Last Generation: https://earth.org/last-generation-activists/

There’s a link to the German language statement from the police which is quite readable after translation, and of course the article itself describes the general activities that they were engaged in and accused of.

Of the activities that they were accused of, it does seem in line with prior environmental activist groups like Extinction Rebellion, Greenpeace, and Earth First!

As for what laws get enforced by a website, that is going to depend on jurisdiction. For example, the USA has section 230 of the DMCA, which holds that website operators are not responsible for user content with the exception of content accused of violating copyright within certain parameters. Doesn’t mean they won’t raid your servers, just means you won’t be held legally responsible if they think you were sufficiently responsive to issues when raised.

At this time I don’t know the specifics of what Germans have to think about to avoid state interference, but it does look like it is more severe than what the US has to do with.

No, the person you are arguing with is correct.

Please click the link at the top and read the full text of the feddit post which it takes you to. It is okay to dislike feddit’s policy, and it is perhaps okay to believe that they are lying and that the words they wrote down explaining what it is are not true.

But this person from another instance whom you are arguing with is accurately describing the content of the text on the feddit post.

What was the appeal of Plex anyway?

Yeah I’m okay with the basic navigation options. The primary point is that man pages do look like they had written by someone who does not do technical writing. Whether that’s someone coming from a law background, programming, or whatever.

It’s not written for an end user who wants to know how to use the tools they have available. It will tell you what a command “does”, sometimes, but it doesn’t explain itself. It presumes a certain amount of pre-existing knowledge, or familiarity with the syntax of man writers.

For another example, the man for ls repeatedly lists options referencing “implied” entries without ever explaining what “implied” means in this context. It presupposes that the reader knows what that term means. I know what an implication is in an English class, and the antonym for “implied” is “explicit”, but in a man page? No clue. Not like there’s reference to or examples of “explicit” entries to contrast with “implied” entries. You just have to know what it means in context, or figure it out some other way.

I don’t think you get what I mean.

I don’t mean that man itself isn’t functional, I mean the way most man pages are written isn’t clear enough to communicate how to use the programs they refer to.

I’d include the man page for man in that, and I’d encourage anyone else to look at it from the eyes of someone who can follow written instructions and ask “How does this manual/help file compare to others I have read?”.

So, for example, in the examples, it says:

man -a intro Display, in succession, all of the available intro manual pages contained within the manual. It is possible to quit between successive displays or skip any of them.

Those two lines are the only place within man’s man page (at least the one you get from man man) that use the string “intro”. What is an intro in this context? Guess you got to run it to find out.

What is -a for? About 200+ lines down there is a two sentence explanation.

The first sentence tells you how man normally behaves, saying: “By default, man will exit after displaying the most suitable manual page it finds.” This sentence is unclear (“When does man exit after displaying the most suitable manual page it finds? When I run man ls I see the manual for ls on my screen until I press ‘q’ to ‘quit’ out of it.”) and not immediately connected to the purpose of the flag/option.

The second sentence says: “Using this option forces man to display all the manual pages with names that match the search criteria.” This is a lot clearer, and my only complaint about it can be that it’s not the first sentence in the explanation.

Tbf, most man files are not easy to understand. Between man, tldr, ArchWiki, and an occasional O’Reilly book I can usually get things done, but documentation on Linux still has a lot of room for improvement.