A lot of subreddits are banning/proposing to ban X links in response to Führer Elon’s wonderful gesture of love and tolerance. Should this instance follow suit?
Also, Instagram/Threads/Meta links. Same question.
You must log in or # to comment.
Wasn’t Lemmy supposed to be for free speech/anti-censorship and shit? Or maybe I got it wrong? Yall do realize there are many reasonable things on X and not just the right-wing/Elon stuff. Right?
Yes, we do realize that. But we can no longer fight them on a platform literally controlled algorithmically from the top-down by the worlds richest man who is backed by the commander-in-chief of the world’s best-funded military. Maybe deleting our accounts is a better strategy then ratioing losers on a platform subject to increasingly open and brazen manipulation.
Lemmy is software that can be used however the instance admin that hosts the community that you are using want it to be used. It is censorship proof which means that you are free to launch your own instance and publish your own content which will be sent to and be accessible from other Lemmy software instances that federate with you and allow the content or people can sign in themselves to your local instance if you allow them to make accounts and access your software and hosting.
That makes sense. I guess the instances I’m using are pro-censorship and not Lemmy itself.
You have to be willing to walk away from and ignore corporate media platforms, or else they’ll never be defeated. And content creators need to also learn to not post their stuff to these platforms.
Some people take umbrage in supporting a publication owned by a nazi.
Soyflakes.
Haha nice one that’s so based and kekpilled my duderino
IKR.
Block them. If they have something interesting or important to say, just quote it. Don’t send them even more traffic and attention.
Agreed. At least send the link shared to Twitter then, if there’s any. A screenshot is better than nothing.
A quote is not a source. The news often misquotes people or takes words out of context.
A tweet should be screenshotted with the original link along with an alternate to xcancel.com.
If the tweet itself has a link or mentions something elsewhere, a link to that source should also be provided.
Sounds like a lot but anything less is misinformation, as far as I’m concerned. So much news and memes have been spread where the subject is taken out of context. Hours or days or years will go by before people come to discover the true meaning of something and by then the impression has already been made.
There’s always xcancel. Does that not solve most people’s concern?
It’s compatible with banning original links, and can break later
Difficult question to answer.
- things happen on Twitter / Threads / Gab/ etc that are important/worth hearing about , or at least interesting, but
- I do not wish to send any traffic to these sites
- and definitely do not wish them making any money from my traffic
In the end I think we should not forbid or block, but be much more careful what we share from those sites. I also think it’s important - very important - to make any competing social media much more interesting to people wanting to be involved and kept up to date. How, I don’t know either but we shouldn’t be too strict on eg Bluesky, rather cooperate or something.
If you dont like X posts, you can not open X links. But dont make others unable to view it if they want
i respect your opinion, your right to have an opinion, glad you shared your opinion, glad to read opposing opinions, Glad your opinion was not suppressed or censored or shadow banned, that someone having purchased access doesn’t drown out your opinion, and others refrained from ganging up to suppress the opposing view.
Sometimes in echo chambers the opposing opinion turns out to be right.
This is not one of those cases. <-- my opinion position
But i really liked that you posted and the opposing opinion was given a fair access to eye balls
I said that if you dont agree with something, thats ok but dont take it away from other people. You said that same thing, but also that im wrong. Thats interesting
Clearly marked and qualified it as just my opinion
Will survive someone disagreeing with you.
Yes
Would it be possible to automatically change Twitter links posted and substitute them with a mirror site?
yes
Slippery slope of censorship. Where would it stop?
Things that aren’t Nazis might be a good stopping point
with a federated linked network of social media sites run by it’s users
what if there became a Nazi ran Mastodon or pixelfed or Lemmy instance?
Was presented with this question. Lets simplify it and remove the spin.
Are you ok with your enemy using the software you've published?I quickly answered,
yes! It's open source. This must include enemiesSimilar to free speech, censorship aside, if not willing to defend essholes being essholes then don’t really have free speech
Linus Torvalds slipped, tossing Russian maintainers. Politicizing open source makes it open for some, but not for others.
Which is a real dilemma cuz i hate everyone equally
To answer your question, the fediverse welcomes Nazi fascists commis gays whatever running instances. If don’t like the instance moderators can always jump on another instance. And instances owners do not federate with instances they don’t like.
… and the world goes on just fine
… does ML still block curse words?
The way I see it, the slippery slope that we’re currently on is tolerating nazis and bigots.
Do you think Lemmy should act like Meta, which banned Pixelfed links and Mastodon instances?
Logic like this is like refusing to use violence against colonizers because your colonizer uses violence.
Tactics cannot be evaluated solely on the basis of whether your opponent uses them. Banning certain sources robs them of a little bit more reach and that’s a good thing if you’re talking about an explicitly fascist platform. I think either screenshots or archive links should be the only time x posts are allowed.
Yes.
Evidence suggests that X is a hate site run by a fascist.
Meta isn’t quite there yet, but heading in the same direction.
Regardless if he is a saint or not, it’s super centralized social media and we shouldn’t support it
Centralisation isn’t inherently bad. It has many benefits from a technical perspective. Remember that none of these social networks got popular through not offering people what they wanted, and the vast majority of people do not want biased or hate filled sites.
But centralisation does give a lot of power and influence to the few, and so far, they have all been found wanting when it comes to not being evil.
recognizing the pattern of owners/mods abusing power and no one really agreeing what exactly that entails, will always find that decentralization is the way that it has to be.
We tried centralization and doesn’t go well. The answer is not to keep trying the same thing.
yes
I’m all for banning oligarchic media (news, social, etc). The dude sig heiled and literally controlled the social media narrative to further his political agenda, and people are like “buT MY fReE sPeACH!”. Also, I can’t even read those posts since they require you to log in.
Yes… we should probably ban Xitter links… but maybe allow other front ends? You know, because screenshots can be forged.
No
