 This is hard to explain, but this debate has about protecting culture. It always has been. If some communities want a moat, that is their decision, not yours. Some people came here because they didn't want to worry about their culture being disrupted by outside factors. To pretend this is not a real concern, as this blog post implies, is disingenuous. 3 comments
This is what I think some critics don't get—federation caught on with these early communities because it was often quite harrowing to be in a marginalized community on a traditional social network, or they specifically want to avoid corporate influence. They made this place hospitable. We owe it to them to at least hear them out when they say “do not want.” There seems to be a genuine split between people who left Twitter because it was UNSAFE, and the people who left Twitter because it was UNUSABLE. The latter group often do not understand that these are not the same concerns. They also do not understand "We should make Masto more like OTHER social media!" is a threat to the former group. |
Gregory's Server
The dogmatism exists because they're trying to protect their culture.
I realize it can be frustrating sometimes and there are real reasons to find it frustrating, but understanding why this comes up is key to understanding this entire messy debate.