If my instance didn’t defederate hexbear I wouldn’t be on the fediverse at all.
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.
Feyd@programming.dev 19 hours ago
null@piefed.nullspace.lol 17 hours ago
What makes it different from just blocking the instance at user-level?
snooggums@piefed.world 17 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 17 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.
ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
I was reading the original discussion on dbzer0 and kept wondering what the removed by mod was under every comment agreeing with either partial ban or defed, so I looked at the modlog. It was literally the same pigshit picture posted over and over again, almost twenty times, by the same user, though fortunately I only had to see it once, by choice.
That’s a serious personal commitment to assholery right there. To be honest I can’t claim to understand some of the political nuance that was coming up in the thread, but that one dude sure did make a strong argument for defed via the modlog, lol. If that’s an example of what dbzer0 has to put up with from individual users of another instance, then considering defederation is absolutely a legitimate discussion to have.
frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 18 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 18 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.
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 14 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
ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 18 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 18 hours ago
Hard disagree, and thats thoroughly evidenced by the usership and engagement numbers.
ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 18 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
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Social networks thrive because they are networks. De-federation collapses the network. Its not more complicated than that.
Less content, less interactions, less engagement.