The problem with these “free speech” instances is that they’ll get defederated really quickly if they aren’t already defederated. You can start your own instance, but don’t be suprised when many instances starts to defederate your instance when the bigotry starts spilling over to the fediverse.
I’m confused. If you run your own instance, allowing no new accounts, can’t you federate with whomever you want, without anything spilling over to other instances? Maybe I don’t understand how federation works if that’s the case…
I mean, just by replying here content from my single user instance (this comment, specifically) is “spilling over” to all the instances who can see this post.
Yup, I totally get that if you decide to post crap on somebody else’s instance, you are “spilling over” and might get defederated.
But I was pondering a different question in my initial message: If I decide to create my own instance, onto which I allow no-one else to create an account, and I’m nice individual with no desire for racism, genderism or any other tendency for -isms, how does my federating with racism-instance.social, on my local instance, spill over to other instances that I also federate with?
This is less of an issue (if any) in Lemmy, but at least in Mastodonland, the fact that you can boost/retweet stuff to other people does mean that a defederated instance can see your content boosted through a “neutral” instance. There were several instances like “dot technology” who went beyond defederating not only the crap instances, but instances that refused to defederate from said crap instances to lessen this problem over there, but with Lemmy not having boosting this isn’t really a problem over here.
Yes you can. You can have a instance completely cut off from the fediverse if thats what you want, but you’d be missing out on most of the content. I don’t know of any such instances that actually have any activity.
deleted by creator
I think it has less to do with their ideology and more to do with the fact that an instance with almost no rules usually attracts shitty people
deleted by creator
In also only just downvoted an didn’t leave a comment. Only after reading your answer I wrote this. The problem is (and it’s probably very hard to overcome), is that people often look for validation and getting downvoted doesn’t feels good because it’s the exact opposite of validation.
But keep in mind that nobody (ok at least me 🤣) downvotes you because I want to hurt your feelings or “to silence” you. Don’t get me wrong but I couldn’t care less. I don’t know you, I don’t know your past, what you do, your mindset, your attitude. All I see is a post I don’t agree with and by downvoting I’m just contributing to a statistic that let’s you and other users know how others roughly think about that post.
I think we should try not to take downvotes to serious. Unless all your posts are downvoted all the time (which could indicate all sort of things) getting some posts downvoted sometimes is perfectly healthy and normal, so try not to take it too personal because non of those people know you, all the know is what you wrote and it didn’t resonate with them.
deleted by creator
I didn’t downvote you because you upset me, and I want you ot of my sight. Blocking, is for that.
I downvoted you, because that comment was hot take trash.
Totalitarian? Would you accuse the voters of a winning political party of unethical behaviour?
What a joke. Democracy must feel so unfair, when you’re losing.
I have no dog in this fight at hand, however this quote got me to thinking:
What a joke. Democracy must feel so unfair, when you’re losing.
Yeah, you’re right. It highlights the fact that Democracy at the end of the day is just mob rule, where 51% of voters could (in theory) vote to kill, silence, or otherwise deprive the rights of the other 49%.
As for free speech issues, my thoughts are that driving them underground to fester and grow out of sight is good for “out of sight out of mind,” but in reality it strengthens their hold over their members through their own persecution complex and allows them a platform where their ideals go unchecked and unchallenged until it’s too late, they already believe it with conviction enough to spread it to other sites, which then they get “persecuted” for (in their eyes) and driven right back to the arms of the people who are manipulating them into these positions to begin with who say “see? We told you everyone was against us!”
Kinda like just letting mold grow in a drippy sink, you can wipe off the outside of the faucet and make it look pretty but the mold is still there in the pipes.
That’s a rabbit hole lol, ended up on some gitea repo with ‘liberated instances’ where free speech* is allowed
*exceptions made for things they don’t agree with probably.
Thanks for the suggestion!
My (not popular at all) instance has a philosophy that boils down to one thing: don’t ruin this for anyone else. Based on that it has several rules, including some that may end up in conflict with each other and some that are very subjective. Ultimately I run this server for me, and want a neutral as reasonably possible view into the fediverse.
I don’t plan on posting things that would piss anyone off enough to defederate (though everyone has different standards, so who knows on that one), and generally expect the same from other users-- especially if that user from my instance is interacting with a community or user from somewhere else. Interacting outside of the tiny confines of my instance means my users are representing my instance, I think it is completely fair to say “Don’t go to someone else’s house and piss in their cornflakes while telling them my address”.
On my instance itself I want communities that are welcoming to others, and hosting communities that make people want to ban my instance at first glance or on principle alone is antithetical to my core philosophy.
