Gregory's Server
I'm growing worried with fediverse trends that, rather than freedom (control over one's own life), promote power (control over others' lives).
I've long been uncomfortable with deletion/edits, that effectively mess with my ability to treat and archive my past feed and use it as reliable memory. being unable to save it elsewhere, to be able to search it or refer to it later, or being regarded as cheating or abusing the system merely to preserve my own memory, seems power over myself that I'd rather not grant others. I'd much rather deletions, edits and whatnot, of posts I've seen before, be visible and advisory, not an Amazon's 1984 book-burning move.
likewise, enabling me to control who can respond to my posts seems to place too much authority on one party, and grant me power over others that I don't deserve. I can understand my not wanting to *see* their responses, but blocking them from responding seems outrageous. why do I get to decide what others get to do? why don't they get to decide it, or have a say? why don't my followers, or theirs? that seems to lead towards authoritarian control and isolated bubbles, rather than to respectful and rich cross-polination of ideas.
to those concerned about abuse, enabling posters to prevent responses from abusers would also enable abusers to prevent reactions from victims and their supporters.
what am I missing?
I've long been uncomfortable with deletion/edits, that effectively mess with my ability to treat and archive my past feed and use it as reliable memory. being unable to save it elsewhere, to be able to search it or refer to it later, or being regarded as cheating or abusing the system merely to preserve my own memory, seems power over myself that I'd rather not grant others. I'd much rather deletions, edits and whatnot, of posts I've seen before, be visible and advisory, not an Amazon's 1984 book-burning move.
likewise, enabling me to control who can respond to my posts seems to place too much authority on one party, and grant me power over others that I don't deserve. I can understand my not wanting to *see* their responses, but blocking them from responding seems outrageous. why do I get to decide what others get to do? why don't they get to decide it, or have a say? why don't my followers, or theirs? that seems to lead towards authoritarian control and isolated bubbles, rather than to respectful and rich cross-polination of ideas.
to those concerned about abuse, enabling posters to prevent responses from abusers would also enable abusers to prevent reactions from victims and their supporters.
what am I missing?
@lxo
Not so related to your post, but I stopped to like fediverse idea, because client-server architecture. It looks to me like fedi is more about internet feudalism than connecting people. It's often no difference if you grant your data to commerce guys or random guys on the internet, anyway someone controls your data and can ban you, do whatever admins want. The idea of fediblock is wrong to me, because it abuses such admin power (even if it does it in a "good" way). P2P is better.