▲ 1139 ▼ 41% of fediverse instances have blocked threads so far!!! (tech.lgbt) submitted 2 years ago by vantablack@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/technology@lemmy.world 578 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 32 points 2 years ago (1 child) Handy site to check your instances thread-blocking status. https://fedipact.veganism.social/?v=2 permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JustSomePerson@kbin.social 17 points 2 years ago (2 children) What a fucking hateful choice of colours. Green for blocking and red for allowing communication. Really shows what kind of perspective the creator has. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Kethal@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago Yeah, the color scheme is the real clue there. It's pretty subtle what their viewpoint is. permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) Apparently this is a divisive topic, moreso than expected. Edited for clarity. Huh? Green means it has been blocked and needs no further action. Red means it needs attention [if you're on the side of defederating that is]. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustSomePerson@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago (2 children) Everywhere else, red means stop and green means go. Here, the creator has chosen to reverse that to emphasize that they consider blocking to be good and allowing people to connect to be bad. No attention is needed for the instances that are marked with red. They are federating. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] calvinbacon@r.nf 3 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (3 children) The point is that it's portraying not blocking as an inherently negative thing, which isn't universally agreed upon at all. Plenty of people would say that they don't need any attention at all. It's not presenting objective in a neutral way, but rather labeling a group as bad. Of course, it's probably fair to assume that the author has no intention of being neutral, but it's still valid grounds to criticize it as a data visualization. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] sheepishly@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think I'd expect political neutrality from the admin of a website literally called "veganism" anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago You shouldn't expect it from ANY site really. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Thanks for the clarification, your second to last line says it all. Sometimes it's easy to forget that many online lack critical thinking skills and/or don't consider the source when browsing. Better to accommodate the lowest common denominator when possible...but to expect that from a biased, private site is asking a lot IMHO. permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JustSomePerson@kbin.social 17 points 2 years ago (2 children) What a fucking hateful choice of colours. Green for blocking and red for allowing communication. Really shows what kind of perspective the creator has. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Kethal@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago Yeah, the color scheme is the real clue there. It's pretty subtle what their viewpoint is. permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) Apparently this is a divisive topic, moreso than expected. Edited for clarity. Huh? Green means it has been blocked and needs no further action. Red means it needs attention [if you're on the side of defederating that is]. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustSomePerson@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago (2 children) Everywhere else, red means stop and green means go. Here, the creator has chosen to reverse that to emphasize that they consider blocking to be good and allowing people to connect to be bad. No attention is needed for the instances that are marked with red. They are federating. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] calvinbacon@r.nf 3 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (3 children) The point is that it's portraying not blocking as an inherently negative thing, which isn't universally agreed upon at all. Plenty of people would say that they don't need any attention at all. It's not presenting objective in a neutral way, but rather labeling a group as bad. Of course, it's probably fair to assume that the author has no intention of being neutral, but it's still valid grounds to criticize it as a data visualization. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] sheepishly@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think I'd expect political neutrality from the admin of a website literally called "veganism" anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago You shouldn't expect it from ANY site really. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Thanks for the clarification, your second to last line says it all. Sometimes it's easy to forget that many online lack critical thinking skills and/or don't consider the source when browsing. Better to accommodate the lowest common denominator when possible...but to expect that from a biased, private site is asking a lot IMHO. permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kethal@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago Yeah, the color scheme is the real clue there. It's pretty subtle what their viewpoint is. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) Apparently this is a divisive topic, moreso than expected. Edited for clarity. Huh? Green means it has been blocked and needs no further action. Red means it needs attention [if you're on the side of defederating that is]. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustSomePerson@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago (2 children) Everywhere else, red means stop and green means go. Here, the creator has chosen to reverse that to emphasize that they consider blocking to be good and allowing people to connect to be bad. No attention is needed for the instances that are marked with red. They are federating. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] calvinbacon@r.nf 3 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (3 children) The point is that it's portraying not blocking as an inherently negative thing, which isn't universally agreed upon at all. Plenty of people would say that they don't need any attention at all. It's not presenting objective in a neutral way, but rather labeling a group as bad. Of course, it's probably fair to assume that the author has no intention of being neutral, but it's still valid grounds to criticize it as a data visualization. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] sheepishly@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think I'd expect political neutrality from the admin of a website literally called "veganism" anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago You shouldn't expect it from ANY site really. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Thanks for the clarification, your second to last line says it all. Sometimes it's easy to forget that many online lack critical thinking skills and/or don't consider the source when browsing. Better to accommodate the lowest common denominator when possible...but to expect that from a biased, private site is asking a lot IMHO. permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JustSomePerson@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago (2 children) Everywhere else, red means stop and green means go. Here, the creator has chosen to reverse that to emphasize that they consider blocking to be good and allowing people to connect to be bad. No attention is needed for the instances that are marked with red. They are federating. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] calvinbacon@r.nf 3 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (3 children) The point is that it's portraying not blocking as an inherently negative thing, which isn't universally agreed upon at all. Plenty of people would say that they don't need any attention at all. It's not presenting objective in a neutral way, but rather labeling a group as bad. Of course, it's probably fair to assume that the author has no intention of being neutral, but it's still valid grounds to criticize it as a data visualization. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] sheepishly@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think I'd expect political neutrality from the admin of a website literally called "veganism" anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago You shouldn't expect it from ANY site really. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Thanks for the clarification, your second to last line says it all. Sometimes it's easy to forget that many online lack critical thinking skills and/or don't consider the source when browsing. Better to accommodate the lowest common denominator when possible...but to expect that from a biased, private site is asking a lot IMHO. permalink fedilink source parent [+] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sheepishly@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think I'd expect political neutrality from the admin of a website literally called "veganism" anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago You shouldn't expect it from ANY site really. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago You shouldn't expect it from ANY site really. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Thanks for the clarification, your second to last line says it all. Sometimes it's easy to forget that many online lack critical thinking skills and/or don't consider the source when browsing. Better to accommodate the lowest common denominator when possible...but to expect that from a biased, private site is asking a lot IMHO. permalink fedilink source parent