Voting to block a domain and having that domain blocked isn’t comparable to electing an authoritarian leader. Dbzer0 can choose who to and not to federate with. Users who don’t like that move to another instance easily.
Voting to block a domain and having that domain blocked isn’t comparable to electing an authoritarian leader.
Nobody has said that? What it does is remove the choice from each individual, which is authoritarian, even if done via majority vote. There was nothing stopping those who wanted the domain blocked to do that themselves.
I just don’t see it as authoritarian. Wasn’t on a whim, it was voted, and the majority voted to defederate.
Does it remove user choice, sure I guess., but so does any form of moderation.
“people voting for something I don’t like” is an especially idiotic way to define it.
You’re right, that would be idiotic. Good thing I didn’t define authoritarian that way, and no, it is not a meaningless word, you can (in fact) look it up in a dictionary which describes the meaning fairly well.
Iceblade02@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Ah yes because nothing authoritarian was ever implemented through a vote…
Personally, I voted against on my db0 account, the top voted comments explain pretty thoroughly why.
Cantaloupe@lemmy.fedioasis.cc 16 hours ago
Voting to block a domain and having that domain blocked isn’t comparable to electing an authoritarian leader. Dbzer0 can choose who to and not to federate with. Users who don’t like that move to another instance easily.
Iceblade02@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Nobody has said that? What it does is remove the choice from each individual, which is authoritarian, even if done via majority vote. There was nothing stopping those who wanted the domain blocked to do that themselves.
Natanael@infosec.pub 12 hours ago
Nobody removed your choice to change servers
Cantaloupe@lemmy.fedioasis.cc 14 hours ago
I just don’t see it as authoritarian. Wasn’t on a whim, it was voted, and the majority voted to defederate. Does it remove user choice, sure I guess., but so does any form of moderation.
QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 16 hours ago
Authoritarian is a basically meaningless word already but “people voting for something I don’t like” is an especially idiotic way to define it.
Iceblade02@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
You’re right, that would be idiotic. Good thing I didn’t define authoritarian that way, and no, it is not a meaningless word, you can (in fact) look it up in a dictionary which describes the meaning fairly well.
QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 14 hours ago
The linked definition doesn’t match with you calling the vote/outcome authoritarian.
Authoritarian/authoritarianisn is so widely defined that literally every country, organisation and movement fits it by necessity in class society
Authoritarian is a pejorative used by idiots to avoid grappling with the reality of one class necessarily suppressing another in class society.
zbyte64@awful.systems 11 hours ago
You didn’t define authoritarianism or specifically say how it is so in this case, leaving us to guess and you to say we guessed wrong.