170
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
170 points (90.9% liked)
Fediverse
40322 readers
1538 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I've noticed this too and have been following the conversation. However, I think self-isolation isn't the answer. Allowing r/The_Donald to go private didn't stop the far right.
What works is challenging these people, constantly. Mockery, abuse, whatever it takes. But building up echo-chambers, or allowing echo-chambers isn't the solution.
Feddit.org bans criticism of Israel. There is no point in a Zionist instance which does not allow debate on its own turf.
We tried they still defending the terrorist statr of Israel. It's like debating neonazis it is useless
its not really an echo chamber, lemmy unlike reddit is decentralised, so nothing is stopping a dbzero user from just making an account on feddit.org and interacting with them, in reddit if the admins decide to ban a community that community is just gone.
also having an echochambers isnt bad, like an instance like blahaj should be allowed to exist and not federate with instances that have a lax policy on transphobia, and thanks to lemmy's decentralised nature you can join or make an instance that does have wide federation
The idealist, liberal myth of the “marketplace of ideas,” in the face of domestic and Israeli fascism.
Socialists—and in particular antifascists & Marxists—understand the paradox of tolerance.
Antifa: the Anti-fascist Handbook
You can't change the mind of someone you don't have access to.
Yes, that's the idea, making sure that Zionists don't have access to anyone.
Does no one here understand the younger generations access to ideas? I think the idea that every one claims of creating echo chambers is not an effective one. The law of diminishing returns (as a business term) states that all else held equal an increase in production( or the free debate or posting of opinions) will not produce more profit after a certain point ( or the changing of others opinions) . When it comes to people posting and espousing for state sponsored genocide I think we have hit the top of that curve. If you stop the flow of that information you are not creating echo chambers but more effectively stopping the spread of bullshit and hate. They have Xhitter. Fucking ban this genocidal shit every chance you get, either foundationally or personally. I dont get a whiff of this on shitjust works because I dont engage with it.
Feels an awful lot like "won't somebody think of the children?"
All that means is you've closed your eyes to the world around you. It doesn't mean that the world has changed. Avoidance doesn't help. It actually makes things worse because you cede the moral and intellectual territory.
Alternatively, you can actually take the fight to people instead of hiding from problems. And as far as what the younger generation sees, if you aren't providing arguments against fascism, against zionism, who is going to win that mind?
No one is hiding from problems, but flowers do not grow in a battlefield. They're trampled. You need to have safe retreat, a place to teach, cultivate and grow. Inclusion means ensuring safe harbor through the exclusion of bad actors. I'm here now in the trench, but I do not have to live in the trench. Don't you get that? I have a place to return to, a place to regroup, discuss, laugh, be marry in dark times. What you're advocating for is a horizonless battlefield, with no end in sight. An endless sea of torment and combat with no safe harbor. And for what? "The market place of ideas'"? What a joke. What a dated and dead concept.
-- Michael Parenti
This idea applies to these modes of communication as well. The ideological expression of an instance is at it's core the ideological view of it's administration in the abstract. There is no equal footing. Zionist instances will ban you on Zionist grounds. Creating an "inclusive" space for Zionists and their cohort. You can not "win" a debate in their realm as they always have the administration on their side.
The same is true for db0. This motion is simply the negation of the contradiction between wanting to maintain an inclusive and welcoming space for Palestinians, anti-zionists of all stripes, Muslim and Arab peoples; and the open federation model of activitypub.
The people who want to get into the trenches will. For those who don't, db0 is finally a safe harbor for those listed above. Free from having their identities, their lives, their humanity debated for the sake of the free market of ideas.
This user is suspected to have relations to Russo-Chinese state media and Marxist sympathies, please report any suspicious behavior to https://cia.gov/
Its not won't somebody think of the children... Its get this shit out of their face. Block it. Thats the beauty of the fediverse.
The initial point was that younger generations feed off engagements. You block the conversation and it doesn't exist. Its not a matter of closing your eyes to the world. Its closing the gates to the exact statement I made. Does no one understand how the younger generation get the information? Engagement. Was the answer. Failure to allow a platform will stop the spread of the misinformation in the first place.
'Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference'.
E: these people and often misinformation machines are not trying to have a discourse. They are planting propaganda. ie. The qoute above. Stop the shit in your home. End the spread by denying a platform.
E2: I mean. I get what your saying on an institutional level, but fuck that this is a social media instance argument so. My first edit stands.
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
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 accent 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 feddit 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.
No. Having instances with varying approaches to defederation is good for the fediverse. Having no defederation is how you end up with nostr.
If my instance didn't defederate hexbear I wouldn't be on the fediverse at all.
What makes it different from just blocking the instance at user-level?
Defederating also blocks the users on Lemmy. Instance blocking at the user level just blocks the communities in Lemmy, you have to block each user individually.
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.
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, and this is apparently just one of the people coming over to do this on dbzer0 comms. 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 multiple individual users of another instance, then considering defederation is absolutely a legitimate discussion to have.
That appears to be a troll account from my instance that was created just to do that, but by that behavior they are almost certainly a hexbear. They'll never change
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.
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.
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.
When avoiding ideas or being challenged yes. When avoiding abuse no
The former often feels like the later.
Even more so when you're not used to it.
This is only the case if you're annoyed by people disagreeing with you. That's what makes echo chambers.
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.
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.
Oh my bad
I mean, allowing echo chambers doesnt really seem avoidable on fedi tho? Like, only one side has to defederate to break two way communication, so if someone wants to avoid you, you cant really stop them, and the whole concept of moderation in a decentralized system relies on each instance being able to selectively view or block content from other instances based on the values of that instance. You cant really say "what works is challenging people" if the people you want to challenge have an "ignore" button for when you get too loud for their taste.