Comment on [deleted]
Kolanaki@pawb.social 6 days agoThere’s only one side of this that is using things as designed, and that would be me blocking things I don’t want to engage with. If a community wants to cater to a very specific group of people, they should be using the tools of the platform that allow them to do so by being set to private snd creating a whitelist instead of leaving it public and expecting everyone to follow the honor system of not engaging if they are not part of the accepted group.
There is no benefit to leaving it public and being private doesn’t make it invisible.
deacon@lemmy.world 6 days ago
In the very broadest sense I don’t disagree with you. Making a community private is a useful tool and can help to simplify strict entry guidelines.
However, given that “Cater to a very specific group of people”, refers to basically half of earth’s population in this case, I do have some quibbles.
I don’t have the data in front of me, but I bet that women represent something quite less than half the population of Lemmy. It doesn’t even stretch the imagination to suppose that they represent just a fraction of the user base.
So this isn’t a niche interest or obscure sub-culture we’re talking about. This is an artificial minority population. Is the simplicity of going private worth the added obscurity and increased friction to what should be organic community growth?
As it is, you had to see it, decide to engage with it, and then learn that it wasn’t meant for you, and you’d have just preferred to remain unaware it ever existed. Never mind that would also ensure most other People remain unaware it exists.
Is it really such a hardship on you for the filter to be set a little wider for the good of that community?