[email protected] has also been blocked from lemmy.world.
edit:
Lemmy.world has released an official response.
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
939 points (99.3% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54698 readers
384 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Like, I think people are upset about blocking the piracy communities, sure, but I think that the real issue is that it feels like everyone is just vibing, doing their thing on their lemmy instances, then this troll comes in all fake concerned about breaking rules, gets utterly piled on naturally, only for the admins in question to come in and "side" with the "loser" in people's eyes.
Yeah, I agree with that. It's not the blocking that's such an issue, it's how they came to decide to do it. Definitely wasn't handled well. I wonder if the (even more) downtime they've been having recently is a result of more people being pissed about this move piling on to the DDOS attacks?
If they had decided to do this a week earlier I doubt it would be this controversial.
Why's that?
I mentioned earlier or elsewhere on this thread that right now, the narrative that I'm aware of is as follows:
Lemmy.world users: just vibing, doing their thing
Concern troll: comes in with a freshly created account to pearl-clutch about scary illegal things
Lemmy.world users: hahaha look at this loser downvotes them to oblivion, resumes vibing
Lemmy.world Admins: Piracy?! OMG that's ILLEGAL, thank goodness someone pointed this out to us
If they had an existing stance on piracy, they should have been already enforcing it. Then it wouldn't look like they were successfully spurred into action by a bad-faith actor.
That narrative appears to be correct, although at the end I think it may have been more like "You know, now that this asshole mentions it, maybe we shouldn't host stuff from these piracy communities as Lemmy's largest instance. That might create problems for us down the road."
They definitely should have been more transparent about why they chose to do it at this particular time.
I'm almost certain that's what actually went down, but I'm explicitly referring to the issue of people's perception.