229

Dbzero has Defederated from Feddit.org following its Governance post about the later's "Zionist Bar Problem" (lemmy.zip)

submitted 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) by Salamence@lemmy.zip to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

512 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Dbzero Governance Vote Post https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/63525728

Ahoy mateys!

A few of our users have recently pointed out that a lot of the pro-Zionist accounts on the fediverse nowadays seem to come from the feddit.org instance.

But whatever the excuse happens to be, they need to do better imo. Israel is currently the most violent, fascist and genocidal nation state in the Middle East (if you exclude the US military bases there). And yet feddit.org seems to regard the Palestinians fighting against Israel’s ongoing illegal occupation of their land as the real terrorists. ....

More context

Our instance already voted to ban pro-Zionist accounts (see https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/60585441 for reference) and the rule that was implemented is here: Golden Rule #8.

As further context, you can find relevant comments and discussion in this post by a banned feddit admin in MoG (that fact they chose to post in MoG is in itself quite telling), and this post about their defederation from quokk.au over anti-semitism allegations has recently become active again. ...

Note 2: If you think feddit.org deserves a full instance ban instead, or have alternative suggestions, then please leave your comments below. If enough people think that’s the better option, then we’ll do that instead.

In the end the Post had around 70% of support by dbzer0 users, who in the comments also called for defederation.

Here is a Link to Dbzer0 instances tab https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/instances where if you go to blocked instances you can see fedddit.org is now defederated

i dont think feddit has made a post now, but when they do i will add it

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 3 points 17 hours ago

Maybe Im not saying this right: Im wasnt arguing for the virtues of echo chambers with that, Im saying, with how fedi is designed, there is no means to prevent someone that wants to make an echo chamber from doing so, so suggesting that one should not allow an echo chamber to exist is a fool's errand. In a more general sense, it seems to me that, either you let people decide what kind of content to see, in which case many if not most will naturally create echo chambers simply because they dont want to see views too different from their own, or you have some means to force people to see stuff they dont want to, which requires some difficult-to-escape authority have power over their media feed and as such is incompatible with decentralized federation (and of course risks that authority pushing everyone into their echo chamber). Both of those things lead to serious issues in my view, so its a bit of a "pick your poison" situation when it comes to social media design. Beyond that though, it does have to be acknowledged that there is simply more content, more messages and people wanting to spread their word, out there than any given person has the time or attention or mental capacity to process. That means that some system must exist that determines what fraction of it all you actually see (even if its just as simple as "the things most recently posted on a given platform when you looked at it"). I can see no way to do this that doesnt introduce biases.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

ah gotcha. Now I understand.

I agree in principal but not in part. I do think its possible to set up echo chambers in the fediverse, and while its not impossible to break out of them, its definitely not convenient.

I agree entirely that its a design/ conceptual issue. I've long argued that the fediverse in its current format is very clearly a "1.0" conception.