Building an echo chamber isn’t something done intentionally. Well… Sometimes it is.
It’s most often created by avoiding people you find annoying, toxic, etc. As long as you keep up that reasoning you eventually only interact with people who mostly agree with you. You’re blinding yourself to counter opinions. The definition of an echo chamber.
Idk if it’s building echo chambers in this case or just wanting to get away from a toxic admin.
See the comments and actively of them before the vote and then as it was happening
Steve@communick.news 21 hours ago
goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 21 hours ago
When avoiding ideas or being challenged yes. When avoiding abuse no
Steve@communick.news 20 hours ago
The former often feels like the later.
Even more so when you’re not used to it.
Nemo@slrpnk.net 20 hours ago
This is only the case if you’re annoyed by people disagreeing with you. That’s what makes echo chambers.
davel@lemmy.ml 19 hours ago
You’re right, we should continue listening to the opinions of fascists and Lolita Express passengers until the end of time, otherwise we’ll be blindly bumping into furniture in our echo chamber.
Nemo@slrpnk.net 19 hours ago
I think you misread my comment. I agree that we shouldn’t let the fascists speak. I’m arguing against the comment above that says blocking fascists is a slippery slope to blocking everyone.
Steve@communick.news 18 hours ago
First: your comment appears to be a reply to them not me. I think that’s where the confusion came from.
Second: You seem to be conflating listening to ideas with supporting them.
Third: Blocking places with bad ideas doesn’t silence the people there or eliminate their ideas. It contributes to their isolation and echo chamber. Often more then yours. You in fact end up helping make them worse. Which of course is worse for everyone.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
Plenty have alleged that db0 admins are toxic. I don’t think that but plenty have. See the ptb sub.
People throw around all kinds of slanderous language all the time: it’s the internet, our account is hyperbole. It’s fine.
The bigger issue that I see here is the cultural tendency to not want your viewpoint challenged, and that’s coming from both sides on this one. It’s also an issue on ml and hexbear; and those instances will throw the same accusations right back in the face of the broader fediverse, and not be wrong.
Every defederation hurts the fediverse, and substantially. The issues that came up in 23’ between .world and .ml, things like that destroy these kinds of projects. Defederation also doesn’t change the minds of those who are on feddit, and for the db0, and versus vice. If you think someone is wrong, you should tell them so, and you need to be able to tell them.
I think it’s the wrong move. I think defederation is always the wrong move. It’s more important to fight about important things than it is to be comfortable right now. If db0 users think reddit is a bunch of fascist Zionists, then get into the comments and call them out. Don’t just let them comfortably be Zionists while you ignore the problem. And the same applies to feddit. If they’ve got the right of it, take the fight and defend your points.
But defederation is a lazy and community damaging move, not just to db0, but to the entire project. Defederation is how Lemmy dies.
ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 20 hours ago
No. Having instances with varying approaches to defederation is good for the fediverse. Having no defederation is how you end up with nostr.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Hard disagree, and thats thoroughly evidenced by the usership and engagement numbers.
ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 19 hours ago
The numbers of fediverse users have more to do with onboarding, VC funding for marketing and the inherent nature of federation itself than it has to do with defederation policies
Feyd@programming.dev 20 hours ago
If my instance didn’t defederate hexbear I wouldn’t be on the fediverse at all.
null@piefed.nullspace.lol 19 hours ago
What makes it different from just blocking the instance at user-level?
snooggums@piefed.world 19 hours ago
Defederating also blocks the users. Instance blocking at the user level just blocks the communities, you have to block each user individually.
Feyd@programming.dev 18 hours ago
It makes it so I don’t have to individually block the myriad trolls that emanate from that cesspool. I was seriously a couple pig shit images from never opening this site again.
frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 19 hours ago
I think defederation only really makes sense if there is a concern of botting. Individual bad actors should be banned on a case by case basis, blanket banning seems shortsighted. However, I do believe there are bots on some instances now, compared to say a year ago where I believe they were more far and few between.
Part of my issue is also with bad actors “flooding the zone”. If enough noise is getting pushed constantly by bad actors/bots, it can sway public opinion just by virtue of people seeing those opinions more often. This was one of the things that killed Reddit for me, personally. Well that and a slew of other issues.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
This is what I agree with. Regardless, I think almost the entire thread would agree that the fediverse/ lemmy is not fully cooked when it comes to the issue of federation.
neatchee@piefed.social 16 hours ago
it is important for people to be able to build spaces that provide community for people who have perfectly legitimate reasons for not wanting certain things around.
unfortunately providing that functionality inherently provides the functionality to create echo chambers for arbitrary reasons
you cannot have one without the other and I’d rather have both than neither