Hey everyone, I’m new to Lemmy and just starting to figure this site out. I mainly moved here because of the censorship on Reddit where they didn’t publish posts that included the slightest word not allowed by their filter and they removed/blocked lots of content. I wonder if it will be somewhat better here (on the official site it says “Censorship resistant - By hosting your own server, you can be in full control of your content.”).

The weird thing I saw with Lemmy was when I wanted to sign-up on the “lemmy.ml” server instance that according to the official Lemmy Servers listing page is a “A community of privacy and FOSS enthusiasts, run by Lemmy’s developers”.

So I thought I try that one when it’s from Lemmy’s own developers. When I wanted to sign-up it required an application that you needed to fill out with one of the requirements being having to copy a sentence from the link provided which links to some article called “The Principles of Communism” which I thought was very odd for a site to do. I’ve never seen a site like this promoting some ideology that directly where it’s part of the sign-up process to almost pledge to some political or religious ideology.

This seemed very sketchy to me. Does anyone know something about this?

  • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    27 days ago

    I appreciate you addressing the downvoting; I had noticed the trend and it’s very easy to jump to the “I’m under a personal attack” conclusion.

    While I believe 107% that each instance owner can do what they want; if this given instance is the first instance to which most people will be introduced, being the closest thing to an “official” instance, should they have a duty, or at the very least, an interest, in maximizing the inclusitivity of their community?

    • would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      if this given instance is the first instance to which most people will be introduced, being the closest thing to an “official” instance, should they have a duty, or at the very least, an interest, in maximizing the inclusitivity of their community?

      I think this goes back to what teawrecks said earlier:

      it’s not a for-profit business

      It’s a private club with a trivial admission process. It’s not just that they don’t care about maximizing inclusivity, growth, and total users, it’s that they don’t want any of that. They want like-minded people and they’re happy to keep out or ban people that don’t fit that mold.

      It feels like you’re saying they should want something else, but I don’t see it as obvious why they would, and I don’t think you’ve explained your reasoning why they would.

      • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        27 days ago

        You know, I never really stopped to consider the reasons for wanting unrestricted growth - after all, unrestricted growth is ultimately unsustainable. I guess I took for granted a cultural bias of my own that I really need to evaluate and see if it’s something worth keeping internalized or to expunge it from myself. Guess I’m taking shrooms and doing some soul searching this weekend!