Most of them are rapists. But their spouses have been so brainwashed that they cannot realise it.
Western media propaganda is shit.
Please quiet down with your bitter Misandry. Your enemies are the elites (men and women).
Let us define the architecture accurately. Federation and centralisation are structurally opposite models.
Centralisation requires a master node. All data flows up to it, and all execution commands flow down from it. If the master node is compromised or crashes, the entire network fails.
Federation is a peer-to-peer topology. Autonomous nodes opt-in to a shared protocol to exchange data, but execution authority remains strictly local. Think of the the Fediverse (Lemmy and Mastodon). When a Lemmy instance federates with the wider network, it does not surrender root access to a central server. It simply agrees to speak the same language. If the network pushes an update the local node disagrees with, the local admin severs the connection and defederates. The local node continues to function perfectly. Federation is coordinated decentralisation.
Regarding your questions on delegates:
1. You are conflating a representative with a delegate. In a hierarchical democracy, you elect a representative. You hand them a blank cheque to make decisions for you. That is executive power.
An anarchist delegate is not a politician; they are a network router. They operate on a strictly bound mandate. They do not go to a council to decide what their zone will do; they go to communicate what their zone has already decided to do. They possess zero executive authority.
2. The structural checksum against fabricated data. If a delegate goes to a regional council and fabricates data to push a personal agenda, it is the equivalent of a corrupted packet. What happens when they return to their local node with a treaty or a mandate they negotiated in bad faith? The local node simply rejects it. Recall is not a lengthy impeachment trial; it is a dropped connection. Because the delegate has no police force, no military, and no executive authority, they have absolutely no mechanism to force the local node to comply with a fabricated agreement. The physical leverage remains entirely at the base.
3. The incentive is system maintenance. You are operating under the capitalist assumption that humans only perform tasks for hierarchical power or financial profit.
Why do people take on the responsibility of a delegate? For the same reason a sysadmin takes the weekend on-call pager, or a flatmate takes out the bins. It is administrative overhead. It is a chore required to keep the shared infrastructure functioning.
In a properly architected horizontal system, these administrative roles rotate rapidly. When you strip a role of executive authority, wealth accumulation, and coercive power, the position becomes completely unappealing to sociopaths and opportunists. The lack of corrupting incentives is exactly what acts as the firewall. You are left with people simply performing routine system maintenance.
The number they are quoting is Dunbar's Number, a biological metric defining the cognitive limit on the number of stable, high-trust social relationships a human brain can maintain. The anthropological average is roughly one hundred and fifty. The argument often found in those spaces assumes that because informal, peer-to-peer trust degrades beyond this point, the only mechanism left to maintain cohesion is a vertical control plane, such as a central committee. This is an architectural failure of imagination that fundamentally conflates coordination with coercion.
Anarchist theory answers this by treating human organisation as a distributed systems engineering problem, demonstrating how architecture can scale without a master node. Authoritarian systems scale by building larger monoliths, which mathematically require middle managers to compress data from the bottom so the single executive node at the top can process it without crashing. Conversely, horizontal infrastructure scales by building an interconnected network of smaller communities, each kept to a size that operates on direct consensus and human trust, and then federating those nodes.
You can observe this architecture functioning in planetary-scale systems like Git, the Linux kernel, or the Fediverse. These ecosystems are built, maintained, and expanded by hundreds of thousands of people, not through vertical command, but through shared protocols. When local syndicates need to coordinate a massive project, they do not elect a president with sweeping authority. They send recallable, strictly mandated delegates to a regional council. The delegate possesses zero executive power over the node that sent them; they act simply as a routing mechanism, moving data between autonomous zones to establish consensus.
And hierarchies are fundamentally inefficient at scale because they introduce severe operational latency. If a worker on a factory floor identifies a critical failure, a hierarchical system requires that data to travel up the chain of command, await processing by an executive entirely divorced from the physical reality of the floor, and travel back down as an order. Horizontal networks optimise for local agency, granting the workers operating the machinery the autonomy to modify it directly, dropping the response time to zero.
The people telling you hierarchy is necessary are conflating structure with subjugation. Scale absolutely requires structure, logistics, and highly refined communication standards, but it does not require executive domination. The claim that humans can only build complex systems under the threat of authority is a cynical and scientifically illiterate view of our species.
I have been on Mastodon since January and just found Lemmy a few weeks back. The initial confusion is completely normal, but they both run on the exact same underlying architecture: the Fediverse.
If you understand how email works, you already understand how Lemmy and Mastodon work. You can have a @gmail.com account and send messages to a @yahoo.com account because both servers speak the same protocol. Lemmy operates exactly like this, but for forum posts instead of emails.
Here is the breakdown of how it works.
What are these called? They are called instances (or sometimes "nodes" or "servers"). An instance is simply a single, independent server running the Lemmy software. lemmy.ml is an instance. lemmy.world is an instance.
Does an account on one instance exist on others?
No. Your account obamacares is permanently tied to the database of the server where you registered (lemmy.ml). You do not exist on lemmy.world. However, because of how the network operates, your lemmy.ml account can interact with users and communities on lemmy.world seamlessly.
Do posts and comments exist on other instances? Yes, through a process called federation. If a user on lemmy.world subscribes to a community hosted on lemmy.ml, their server will reach out to your server and request a copy of the posts and comments. The data is duplicated and cached across the network wherever there is active interest.
If banned from one instance, are you banned from all? No. Bans are strictly local. If the admin of lemmy.ml bans you, your account on that server is dead. However, you can simply go to a different instance, register a new account, and immediately resume interacting with the wider network. The only exception is defederation. If a specific instance becomes a hub for spam or toxic behaviour, the admins of other instances can block that entire server, severing the connection completely.
What is the relationship between the instances? The relationship is a shared language. They communicate using an open-source protocol called ActivityPub. It is the standard that allows an independent server in Germany to exchange posts, votes, and comments with an independent server in Brazil. Mastodon uses the exact same protocol, which is why a Mastodon user can follow and reply to a Lemmy community directly from their microblogging feed.
How are they stored and served? There is no blockchain, no peer-to-peer torrent magic, and no decentralised "pool." It is brutally simple: an instance is just a standard computer (usually a rented Linux VPS) running a web server and a PostgreSQL database. It is maintained and paid for by whoever set it up--usually an individual admin or a small group of volunteers.
How much privacy is there? Assume absolutely zero privacy. Private messages (DMs) on Lemmy and Mastodon are not end-to-end encrypted. Structurally, a DM is just a standard post with its visibility flag set to "direct" rather than "public." This means the database administrator of your instance-- and the database administrator of the instance the person you are messaging belongs to --can read your messages in plain text by querying their database. Never use Fediverse DMs for sensitive information.
Are deleted posts gone for good? Not reliably. When you delete a post on lemmy.ml, your server deletes it locally and broadcasts an ActivityPub Delete request to every other instance that previously copied it. Well-maintained instances will receive that request and honour it, erasing their local copy. However, you have zero control over those remote servers. If a server is offline, misconfigured, or run by an admin who refuses to process delete requests, your comment will linger on their hardware permanently. Treat everything you post to the Fediverse as indelible.
Ahh. A true display of the American Right Wing politics.
I mean could less be expected of a follower of Jesus? Considering the fact that he decided to come back as a pedo-rapist.
How would you know if you don't try?
Probably just wanked off to a catgirl. His post was inspired by the post-nut clarity.
That is a good "trad" wife.
No one likes the Orange man ๐โโ๏ธ
*Regional Instability Triggers Resurgence of Maritime Hijackings in Somali Territorial Waters