What’d I miss?
Just some Lemmy web front end that rolls with some instances for which the admin injected a block list for accounts that are unapologetically pro-trans and/or leftist. People, myself included, are on that block list. There is much more to it but that’s the jist.
So just the usual stupidity then. Cool. Wish people could just act normal. Diversity is a natural thing and to deny it is insanity.
You’re probably blocked now for saying that.
Good?
Yeah, it is a sign that you are a good and decent person IMO.
Awesome, do I get a club card? Is there a badge? Do we have weekly or monthly meetings? ;)
you just know he totally comes here on another instance to read the responses anyway
we seeeee you
how else would he get his little peepee hard enough if he doesn’t feel belittled?
I wish I was blocked, but I lurk too much around here.
Active everyday, but in the shadows.
That’s a big distortion. They are accounts that advocate violence or other problematic political views. Many of them are also LGBT, but that’s not why they are on the block list.
I do think it’s problematic for a client/frontend to default-block any group of individuals or instances at all, but portrayimg it as motivated by bigotry when it’s not is pretty messed up too.
but portrayimg it as motivated by bigotry when it’s not is pretty messed up too.
Explain to me the non-bigoted reason for blocking the entire lemmy.blahaj.zone instance (which is predominantly trans), as well as blocking various terms related to queer identities. (Hint: there isn’t one, fuck this guy.)
Aw, you poor widdle soul. Stating they are advocating “problematic political views” is just telling on yourself, isn’t it?
You’re right, I should specify (although the condescension is not helping your case). They are views deemed problematic by the Tesseract dev.
I’ve had run-ins with other devs or instance admins who find my views problematic, and banned me from their community/instance/whatever. That’s unfortunate, but it’s transparent. People know who the petty tyrants are and act accordingly.
This is something different.
Having a frontend preemptively blocking users and instances based on the sole judgment of the dev is unprecedented AFAIK. We don’t need to invent intimations of bigotry to see why this is wholly bad for the platform. It goes against basic principles of transparency, openness, and free choice that the Fediverse is based on.
I believe that a front-end (client) should be a tool to access the service/network. It shouldn’t be making content decisions. If someone wants to make a block list and publish it for others to use, that’s great. If someone wants to trust an admin for content curation/blocking, well… that’s how this whole thing works. People choose or change instances based largely on that trust. But to have a tool for accessing the network also modifying the content? That’s bad, and a bad precedent.
You didn’t see the Tesseract admin’s deleted rant then huh.
Not sure. I only saw this.
Oh you did. Hmm. Thanks for posting the link, I thought it was lost by deletion.
They are accounts that advocate violence or other problematic political views.
My username appears on the list and I don’t believe my comment history aligns with this statement at all. I believe my username is just unique enough to not have another instance of it. Selection of some usernames do not appear to support their (admiralpatrick) claims of violence advocation nor extreme political views.
See, THIS is the issue I wish people would focus on. The dev of a pretty important frontend has set up a block list. They have made it the default. They have not applied a clear and equitable criteria, set up a community feedback channel, or any sort of crowdsourced input.
The modlog is open, meaning that anyone can see exactly what moderators and admins (generally) are up to. People can (and do) push back when things decisions are punitive, arbitrary, or unclear.
This is not that. You have no way to see why your username was included, or correct it if it was in error. There is no community feedback to direct what standard makes sense.
That’s the problem. It’s draconian. By manufacturing some shrill accusations of bigotry, yeah, it makes a lot more flashy posts, but doesn’t help in addressing the issue. If we can’t accurately name problems, we can’t solve them. We are just a mob on a witch-hunt.
You could have said something as innocuous and logical as trans folks have the right to defend themselves or a thousand other violence adjacent notions. Objection to violence outright is just navel gazy utopic thinking. It sounds nice but it isn’t practical reality. There is always a line.
I noticed that they also banned some accounts that have 0 interactions (comments and posts) which is kinda stupid lol
(Example of an account: Axolotlqueen)
Guessing you checked the list for your name again right before posting this lol
Why would you believe that reasoning? This guy is your friend or something?
Nope, I’m just a rational person who doesn’t automatically buy into hysteria.
Nope, I’m just a rational person who doesn’t automatically buy into hysteria.
Wow you’re so much smarter and better than everyone, you’re so cool(🖕)
Believing without questioning some shit you read on the Internet is the last thing I would call rational
happy cake day!
Thanks!
In my experience anonymous people online don’t hide their bigotry behind an eloborate 10-point system. In this case, yes. I believe the motivation is exactly as it’s presented.
The fact that the dev clearly thinks it is a fair justification shows exactly the mindset. The problem is bad enough on its own without making up additional poorly founded accusations.
Now you’re just making up shit that I supposedly believe. The far more likely explanation for them doing this is “whatever reason they have at the time for not liking someone”.
Take all the time you need.
What is it motivated by?
What’s even the point of running a lemmy front end if you are going to block 99% of lemmy?
Where can I see if I’m on the list? I want to be on the list!
Edit: I’M ON IT! I would like to thank the academy…
Ah, Lemmy and refusing to be exposed to opinions you disagree with. Classic.
Someone’s existence is not to be debated. It’s not an opinion to agree or disagree with. The frontend’s creator needs to learn that lesson.
I wanna find out if I’m on the list!!! I mean I doubt it but maybe…
Is this the guy?
Trying to “save” the fediverse?
Didn’t we have this discussion before on Lemmy? I remember seeing a blocklest in some frontend before. Was that something else than Tesseract?
This guide page goes into what an alternative UI is, and some of the popular ones that are available. It is a little out of date,
lemmy.ca also dropped tesseractwe are no longer hosting Tesseract for lemmy.cahttps://fedecan.ca/en/guide/threadiverse/alternative-uis
The controversy around tesseract is better explained elsewhere, but it boils down to a questionable blocklist that the dev was injecting into the tool, without it being made apparent to the users or admins
How can an instance drop support for a fronted?
I’ll edit that comment for clarity
We host a few of the frontends on our own infrastructure, which improves performance for users, among other benefits like reducing strain elsewhere. It’s also easy for our local users to remember that
old.lemmy.cagoes to the old interface,photon.lemmy.cato photon,blorp.lemmy.cato blorp etc. We are taking down the Tesseract one.Thanks, that makes a lot more sense.
Also a pretty awesome band https://www.tesseractband.co.uk/
apparently its an enemy list of a POS lemmy facist.
Fediverse has the best drama.
It’s the 4D analogue of the cube (a shape whose every “face” is a cube)
🖐️
It’s a book by Alex Garland
Same, and really IDGAF
It’s slow right now, man. Give it a week or so and they’ll find Mitch McConnell’s body in a river somewhere or something and we’ll be right back to our usual.
Unfortunately the river security cameras will be down for maintenance that day.
