Did the admins poll the community about it? Why was such measure so needed? If the tankie content is so annoying why not let users decide what they want to see or not and what they want to block?

I don’t like that the admins want to censor the content I can view or not. You guys are not protecting us nor doing us a favor, you’re imposing your views over everyone else by limiting the information we are able to receive.

I don’t support the devs views or the views in lemmygrad, but this is a dangerous precedent.

I’ve read several of the “arguments” for blocking the instance and all I can see is a bunch of people talking about politics and arguing about “floods in the frontpage”. Well, let the user block communities if that’s the case, same way I’m already blocking communities I’m not interested.

I think the admins want to feel like Facebook moderation. I’d be OK with it if any instance repeatedly generated spam, security, doxxing or any other concern that couldn’t be solved by banning individuals, otherwise it’s just plain censorship.

I just don’t want the admins to use their power to decide what I can see or not. If this is going to be like this, I’ll leave for a better instance because I can see where this is going to.

  • @JamesMayOwnsMySoul@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    11•1 year ago

    I am in no way opposed to Lemmygrad being blocked, it’s not really the kind of content that I want to see.

    But, I do understand how one of the main attractions of sh.itjust.works is supposed to be that it just works, regardless of what you may want to post about, and that blocking communities isn’t very conductive to that. I think the answer here should be democracy, doing a poll on such things isn’t a hard thing to do, I think most of us would have been fine with the block.

    • GodEnglish
      9•1 year ago

      What about what the admin wants to see? Everyone do be like it’s their right to choose but they choose by being here. The admin chooses what he likes, people choose whether they like what the admin likes or not. If they don’t, they either don’t join or they leave. If they do, they join and stay. Simple as that. I don’t see why people should try and force their ideas onto some dude who prolly just doesn’t want random genocide denial loonies filling the comment sections with hateful vitriol about why certain parts of the population should die.

      • @JamesMayOwnsMySoul@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        3•1 year ago

        I guess I’m just philosophically objected to dictatorship in that way. I completely agree that I don’t want random genocide denying loonies filling the comments section, I just don’t think it’s much effort to ask people. I also imagine a lot of people here are attracted to this instance because it’s supposed to be less complicated than other instances where there’s a lot of moderation about what can and cannot be seen by users. So when it comes to banning whole communites (which in this case I think is completely justified) there should be caution and discussion.

        • GodEnglish
          7•1 year ago

          I just don’t think it’s much effort to ask people.

          “Hey guys so i was thinking we shouldn’t allow genocide denialists into our network, but i don’t know, hmmm should i let genocide denialists into your network? here’s a poll”

          maybe for other more neutral communities maybe but for this one i 100% agree to onesided ban since it’s just a political sub and an extreme one at that.