Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
stux⚡

Blocking other instances because they won’t block X or Y is childish

Please worry about the blocks on your own instance and don’t force them onto others. That’s why they chose to run their server and not join yours😘

As user you can block individual people and even complete domains(instances). Instance admins/mods can do the same on instance level. That should be enough to moderate content you’ll see

But for the love of cats, stop with dictating terms to other instances..

19 comments
Robbie Norlyn :coffefied:

@stux #Yes #True Unfortunately, merely saying this out loud is probably going to generate drama.

stux⚡

@robertnorlyn Perhaps the right kind in this case :ablobwink:

Sometimes posts like these act as great filters and attract the bad actors sicne they can't keep it to themselves :blobcatgiggle:

Besides a veeeery small partion of the Fedi is set in these ways but it will get them nowhere in the long run ❤️ unfort..

evolbug

@stux i never understood the infighting over blocking, if you (instance A) block an instance B doesn't that mean that even if instance C still federates with B you don't see the content anyway? if so, what's the problem?

Abbie 🏳️‍⚧️

@evolbug
I think the issue is, if you block instance B, instance B can still get the info from instance A via federating with an instance C?
@stux

evolbug

@antijingoist @stux why does that matter? posts and account information are open to the entire web through the AP api regardless, unless explicitly obscured. blocking only goes one way, you can only stop incoming things from specific addresses, not outgoing. forcing others to defederate with someone you dislike to avoid reads is a futile exercise, especially for large instances where the pathways are in the order of tens of thousands

Rev. Andy 🐺 🌿 🪱

@stux You and your family live on a street with lots of neighbours.

One of your neighbours makes racist jokes and hangs Nazi flags in their garden. You choose not to speak to that neighbour, and ignore them.

A second neighbour doesn't make racist jokes or hang Nazi flags in their garden, but is happy to listen to the first neighbour, share their jokes with others, and so on.

Do you continue to be friends with the second neighbour? Or choose not to, to protect your family? Seems simple to me.

Stéphanie Pageau

@andy @stux I do think it depends on the kind of neighbour. If it's a Nazi, well then yeah. But if first neighbour likes to have wild flowers on its front yard, but second neighbour hates it and don't want to talk to first neighbour.. you can still be friends with both.

Grutjes

@Pheneatis

So what do you expect Meta to bring to the table: flowers?

@andy @stux

Stéphanie Pageau

@Grutjes @andy @stux Stux wasn't even talking about Meta. I've seen very childish examples of what he's referring to here.

Sander 🔑

@andy @stux if you can’t argue the case don’t try to hide it by resolving to bad metaphors please. It’s not a good look.

deegeese

@andy @stux In your analogy, this is forbidding your spouse and children from talking to the neighbors who are friendly with the everyone.

Alexey Skobkin

@andy @stux
Yes, I will continue.

I feel some Minority Report vibes from your argument.

These people are not obliged to do anything. The sole fact that they're not building a wall with another house doesn't mean that they're supporting such ideology. They can have ideology of their own and respect others freedom if others don't infringe on someone else's freedom. They can even argue and actively disagree with such "bad neighbor".

Grutjes

@stux

It's not about dictating terms.
It's about an open discussion about collective action.

You can't solve everything on an individual basis. Sometimes we need solidarity and need to work together.

I think there's nothing wrong with discussing the best options, and people voicing their opinion.

Frans Veldman :verified:

Would you like your email provider to block all emails from gmail accounts from reaching you? Just because some of us consider Google as an evil privacy invading company and want them to stop participating in the email infrastructure?

Why would we treat Meta differently than Google?

Go ahead and block all emails coming from gmail accounts, and block all toots coming from Meta-accounts. But don’t force it upon the rest of us. The internet is about free choices. Email is, and fediverse is.

If we preemptive block all toots from meta-accounts, we’re killing the Fediverse. And maybe that is exactly what Meta wants. So don’t take this bait!

Would you like your email provider to block all emails from gmail accounts from reaching you? Just because some of us consider Google as an evil privacy invading company and want them to stop participating in the email infrastructure?

Why would we treat Meta differently than Google?

Go ahead and block all emails coming from gmail accounts, and block all toots coming from Meta-accounts. But don’t force it upon the rest of us. The internet is about free choices. Email is, and fediverse is.

stux⚡

@Grutjes Sure! I’m all for talking

But like my post said, this is about enforcing their stuff on others :ablobwink: there is no talking but rather: “you listen to me otherwise we will block you”

That’s not a conversation but a monologue

Blocking means you do not want to talk about it

Alexey Skobkin

@Grutjes @stux
I think it's more about cases when X blocks Y for federating with Z. I saw a buch of blocks like that.

Go Up