Some of the instances that we have chosen to defederate with have explicit political stances and ideologies. Their political stance and ideology had nothing to do with the choice to defederate. The choice to defederate was based on the amount of hate speech present on the instance and/or explicitly endorsing it.

What fucking hate speech, you weasly, lying shitlib. Your kind cheers on Russian deaths, calling them “orcs”, then you have the audacity to accuse us of hate speech? Go on, make more orientalist posts about China, and then come back and lecture us on hate speech.

The only “hate speech” I have is the hate for your dogshit, genocidal politics.

Our instance explicitly disallows and bans bigotry, and he’s going around posting this shit

Edit: And thinking about it more, the admins are basically agreeing going “fuck the devs we would switch off if we could”, after everything the devs did to placate them, offering to pay for server hosting, putting them and not us on the reccomended server list, explicitly pinning posts asking people to go else where, and they’re still shitting on them for “muh evil tankies!!!”. The devs should have never listened to these whining liberals, and I think should maybe defederate from beehaw themselves like holy fuck you can’t trust liberals for anything

  • TheGreatSpoon@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    the only kind of politics that are banned here are those which enable hate speech such as fascism

    What’s with all the backlash? They just announced they’re banning anything promoting the US state (ergo CIA) or NATO. Sounds like a W to me.

    Jokes aside and at the risk of sounding like an armchair intellectual, this is sort of a small scale experiment proving why liberals make peaceful progress impossible. Dating back to the colonial era, they love writing walls and walls of vague idealist text (especially the part about the psychology of internet users reads like a middle schooler padding out an essay) about the moral virtue of their actions to distract from the fact they are shamelessly plundering, murdering and exploiting others. In this relatively harmless case, exploiting the devs ideological conviction and choice to show vulnerability. Using their resources to take the platform for their own, despite quite ironically being in direct in violation of their own conceptions of intellectual property that are supposed to be so non-negotiable.

    Maybe that’s why liberals are such firm believers in private property to begin with. Not due to principle, but because they project their shameless opportunism on us all; they fear others will do to them what they have done and continue to do to their vulnerable targets of choice.

    • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      back to the colonial era

      Don’t forget the apologism for that era in the OP. A kind of liberal version of ‘no ethical consumption under capitalism’ but with no concept of working towards a system that allows for the possibility of ethical consumption – outside capitalism.

      Highlighting that we can’t avoid using tech with problematic roots isn’t enough if you’re going to keep pouring fertiliser on those roots to keep the rotten tree growing.

      The phrase is meaningless unless it implies, ‘no ethical consumption under capitalism, therefore we must overturn capitalism’.

      • Preston Maness ☭@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Highlighting that we can’t avoid using tech with problematic roots isn’t enough if you’re going to keep pouring fertiliser on those roots to keep the rotten tree growing.

        Fucking gold.