• IGS@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    just hoping this is unbiased, unlike other platforms. harboring just one view and silencing others played a big part in getting people to jump ship

    • VVoVV@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a good news bad news situation. Each individual instance can, will, and should moderate as it sees fit. When you pick an instance you pick a community just like in the real world.

      Some communities are completely open, anything goes. You are absolutely free to be a gay nazi seal clubber (or any other group that there are people may not like). The drawback is there are entire communities that really hate seal clubbers. Those communities are just as free to block content coming from them.

      That is a kind of restriction.

      The good news is that the restriction is 100% explicit. There’s no invisible algorithm quietly hiding your posts. You just can’t force people to see seal clubbing videos if they find them repugnant.

    • qprimed@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      you will end up finding many instances with their own vibe and many communities between all of the various instances to suit your tastes. just give it a chance and look around.

  • TWeaK@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    After paedophile Steve Huffman has been caught lying so many times, why should anyone believe a word he says?

    • VVoVV@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh friend, read the article in the comment. It couldn’t be more obvious that you shouldn’t believe him.

      • TWeaK@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I did read it, however the article never really called him out on it.

        I get that journalists shouldn’t express opinions, and this article does manage that at least. However they should at least clearly display contradictions and hypocrisy, such that no reader can walk away without recognising it. This article doesn’t quite meet that bar - someone hooked on this paedophile’s lies could walk away after reading all his quotes and still think he’s fair minded.