OpenStars comments on First ban on my new account! Once again for voting "wrong"...in the "voting community" 😑

First ban on my new account! Once again for voting "wrong"...in the "voting community" 😑 (lemmy.ca)

submitted 1 year ago by ech@lemmy.ca to c/yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com

90 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I downvoted maybe 3 posts for being "unwise", but I guess that's not allowed. Looked up the mod and they banned a wave of people, all for "...". Good stuff.

This "banned for using the functions of the website" shit is really getting out of hand. Unless it's unequivocal support for every post, you're out. It's ridiculous out here.

Also! We still can't block communities we've been banned from? Wtf?

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I am not downvoting you but your reply here is not very well thought out. Perhaps it is just your presentation.

It reads like a "you should smile more, because I am such a nice man" Reddit-esque position, where you should have all the freedom to do whatever you want - e.g. downvote people - but then others should not have the freedoms to respond to your actions in whatever manner they decide is best for themselves?

Perhaps indeed you would be happier at an instance - such as reddthat.com - that disables downvotes, rather than the freedom-loving anarchist lemmy.dbzer0.com. But that would be YOUR choice, you do not get to make MY choices for me.

Also, you are factually incorrect: downvotes are in fact public information, despite how the web UI client and most apps do not provide an easy means to disclose them. e.g. your last downvote (that I can see) was on July 27 for https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/21688252. Anyone at any time can see these, with a tool that discloses that info, and it has always been thus, from the very beginning of Lemmy?

Although I hope you choose to think that thought through more deeply: why should anonymous voting (as you seemed to think it was) be allowed, and also end-users prevented from being able to do anything in response to it? How is that in any way "more" (rather than less) free, when one under-class of users is subject to the nonconsensual recipient of e.g. voting barrages - i.e. you get what you want but neither the recipient nor any innocent third-party bystander is free to do the same? In a truly free society, people need to be able to make choices for themselves - which PieFed provides to end-users in that regard, whereas Lemmy provides that choice only to admins and mods.

Do not gloss over that latter point: there is an enormous distinction between an "institutional(-ized)" echo chamber, where the tools or locality themselves enforces it - an example being lemmy.ml that infamously site-wide bans people from communities that they have never even heard of for comments made in unrelated communities, if they are even slightly critical (or not support enough?) of Russia, China, or North Korea - and the choices of the end user. People should be allowed to dislike things, if that is what they desire, and they should not be forced into using 4chan, if they do not choose to, imho. I can see why authoritarians would want to literally force people into viewing content that they did not want to see, but why would freedom-loving people do so?

Again, do as you please, but I ask that you allow me to do the same (even if I only speak on behalf of those who may choose to use those tools, I am a HUGE fan of their existence, in offering that choice to people for them to make, as they please!:-). As an example, perhaps for 350 days of the year I choose to expose myself 100% to people's emotional vomiting, but then for a couple weeks I decide to take a break from (waves hands) all of this that is going on in the world - am I allowed to have desires, and to make that choice? PieFed says: ABSOLUTELY, here you are FREE! Lemmy: lol no bitch, you'll take what a mod decides to offer and like it.

Sorry if I came across too strong here - I recognize that you have been under the oppressive regime of Lemmy and Reddit for so very long, that your position of what "freedom" is (the ability to make choices) is likely very skewed, as mine was too, but the good news is that you do not have to remain under that yoke any longer than you want to: you too are free! Research how PieFed.(social|world|blahaj.zone|ca|zip|au|dk, etc.) works and you will surely stand in awe of it like me! But if not... then that's okay too, I support your right to do as you please - though I would hope that you would offer the same consideration to others too?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

I think you are replying to another person.

I don't remember writing at any point that downvotes are private. I read again my comments just in case, I didn't. So I don't know what's going on here.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Okay then to get back to the core of the issue and summarize: if you don't want to use something - a feature, a piece of software, whatever, then do not use it? It really is as simple as that.

I was saying that PieFed offers additional capabilities beyond Lemmy. If you choose not to avail yourself of those, that is entirely your choice, and I support you doing whatever you like in that regard!:-) But so too should others have the identical freedom. I am not debating that places such as 4chan (where anything and everything goes) may have merit or not, just that the subject under discussion was whether "Didn't piefed came with built-in echo chamber features", to which I was saying yes sorta but mainly no not really.

Mods on PieFed have one additional option beyond what Lemmy mods have: the latter can only "remove content" vs. "not remove content", whereas PieFed mods have a more middle-of-the-road option where they can choose to not remove content far more often, trusting that the automated filters will remove the content only for those users who have indicated their preference to not see such, rather than force a choice that affects all users one way or the other. To me that sounds like the literal opposite of the "echo chamber effect", from the standpoint of the mods, even though yes users can surround themselves in such a bubble if they so choose.

As too they could under Lemmy as well, requiring a bit of effort to block many users but it can definitely be done, whereas PieFed provides the option to use community-based moderation to achieve the same end, and in the process affects each item of content individually, while allowing users to not have to block other users, and thereby all content from them, to achieve this effect. e.g. I could see an icon for a highly contentious user who receives 10x more downvotes than upvotes, and choose to ignore that fact and respond anyway, or else be more measured in my response, or just read it and continue scrolling.

Think about that last option: I would be able to read the content in this scenario, even if I chose not to respond, whereas if I block the entire user account then I will not even see it in the first place? Blocking is a heavy hammer, whereas user labels are the gentlest of informational resources. Lemmy provides ONLY the option to either block vs. not block, both to mods of communities as well as to individual end-users of one another, whereas PieFed provides many alternate forms of nuance via tools that the users can use, or yes abuse, as they so choose.

More choices = freedom. More exposure of content is the opposite of an echo chamber effect. PieFed provides more choices to allow for more exposure of content than Lemmy does, which only offers the removal/block features without the nuances that PieFed allows for.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

It's quite simple.

Each person is an individual, with their own sets of values.

Piefed is only one, if those rules federate (I'm not sure about this) in all piefed there only "one" community.

If you are inline with that community you'll be very happy with the "community" moderation.

If you are not inline you will not be happy.

Only happy people who is inline with community moderation will stay, because, why stay in a place that you don't read people you like and other people cannot read you. So then there's the echo chamber.

If for you the echo chamber is a feature, as it seems, then just admit it. I think we are down to the fact that "echo-chamber" is a name with bad connotations, and thus the pushback. We can give it another name "hideous-free chamber".

But at the end is a space where you are only going to communicate with people that agree with you. If you like that space then go to that space, it seems that you think that's positive "not having to be blocking all the time and letting the system block for you". If you are inline with that system then, as I said, you'll be happy there.

But don't sell it as what it's not. It's not a place where diverse opinions could exist, by definition. Only the majoritarian opinion could exist there, by design.

I get an issue, because it seems like you are saying that in piefed each person can moderate then there's "more different moderators", or something like that. But it's not, as all moderation, votes, are pack together and there's only ONE moderation, the moderation of the majority.

At the end, time will tell. Piefed do exist, and it's rolling. It's just a matter of giving it time and seeing if the place is more diverse than lemmy or not. Lemmy it's quite diverse, it's a hard objective, most people here don't even agree with Lemmy devs, and there are distinct groups in distinct instances with very diverse values (in fact I get the feeling that piefed was mostly created to separate themselves from one of those groups), let's see of in a couple of years there's such diversity in piefed. I don't know how it's going to be possible, as people who would have diverse opinions would be affected by the automatic moderation feature and will promptly leave the space, but let's see.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 2 points 1 year ago

I presumed too much, my apologies. I thought you were talking about the "echo chamber effect", which is a topic of much contention among people who discourse about social media platforms. If you were simply saying that people like what they like and do not like what they do not like, then yes, that much is true - although in that case I am not sure why it needed to be said? - although even there, PieFed allows for more options to moderate such than Lemmy does, while remaining the same in other ways. But I am not trying to push you into anything that you do not want to know about.