Then blocking it will be!

Trans people are allowed to make their own choices about how they deal with Rowlings transphobia.

The responses in this thread highlight my point. If you don’t have explicit rules to stop that shit in its tracks (which you don’t), you aren’t queer friendly, because queer folk can’t exist there without being told that transphobia is fine actually, as long as you like the person doing it.

When you say “queer friendly”, are you, the admin of the instance, gender diverse and thus directly impacted by Rowling’s transphobia? Because that’s the only voice that I’m open to hearing “queer friendly” from when it comes to Potter and Rowling.

If you’re not impacted by her bigotry, you have no place claiming that it’s queer friendly, whilst actively refusing to engage with the reality of her transphobia.

Perfectly said

That’s not true. Bigots can go into web view and still see posts, they have alts on other instances.

Absolutely, but nothing we’re talking about here will stop bigots targetting specific people. What we can do though is decrease the drive by bigots, the ones who just spew hate at whoever they happen to stumble across, or whoever pops up in a hashtag search etc.

You run AP, it is not a secure protocol it was never intended to be.

I’m aware. However the options aren’t “free for all” or “impenetrable security”. There is a whole spectrum of approaches between those two extremes, and that’s what we’re talking about here. Insisting that the issue is all or nothing doesn’t help

Beehaw was here long before the fediverse was popular and long before the reddit disaster that sent people rushing to lemmy. Before reddit happened, they were one of the few active and successful lemmy instances that wasn’t basically just a lone admin hosting a personal instance.

They didn’t “use the fediverse to help them grow”. They helped the fediverse grow when hardly anyone else was around.

Just like AP, the bigot can join another instance/relay, if an instance has bad moderation policy, your relay can block that instance/relay entirely.

By your own admission, this doesn’t happen though. One relay is the same as the other, and that’s because the bigot can just use multiple relays as well, making the effort of an admin blocking them largely a waste of time.

They can do this in AP too.

They can’t though, because on AP, an instance that constantly spawns bigots with throw away accounts gets defederated, and that means that bigots have a barrier that doesn’t exist on Nostr. On nostr they can create unlimited accounts and use unlimited relays to broadcast their content, relying on the admins to block each and every account manually (which they generally won’t do, because what’s the point?), which ultimately leads to the end users having to play whack a mole with the bigots.

There’s no way to solve this unless we start requiring a passport photo with every account or a payment or something

I don’t have any answers for you. But I can tell you that I actively prefer APs implementation to Nostr’s because APs current implementation is safer.

In Nostr, your relay gets to make and enforce it’s own content policies just as easily as it does on AP

And yet they don’t.

If you as a user can connect to multiple relays, then most people will do that, making the act of an admin banning a bigot on one relay pointless, because the bigot will still get through on other relays, and once they’re blocked on enough relays, they’ll just make another throw away account. Which means most admins won’t bother acting except in the most egregious cases, leaving it up to the users to deal with their own blocks.

I agree, there needs to be an answer here that lets people keep their identities tied to them rather than an instance, but the nostr approach isn’t it. It just leads to everyone for themselves, which is fine for some people, but it’s exactly what many other folk were trying to escape by coming to the fediverse in the first place.

In Nostr, each relay can set its own policies. Relays can and do establish policies for acceptable behaviours.

Sure, but it’s still each relay admin playing whack a mole with bigots as they pop up with new accounts.

On AP, because identities are tied to instances, the instance admin can kick the bigot and they’re gone for everyone, before many folk ever see it. And if there is an instance with admins that don’t deal with bigots, the admins can defederate from the entire instance.

Nostr doesn’t give you any of those options. An instance is just a generic relay. No community, no differentiation, no protection for vulnerable folk. Which is fine if your goal is “free speech” but not so good if you’re a member of a vulnerable minority just trying to connect with people/communities without having to be super on guard.

I left twitter to get away from an environment like that. I’m not going to head back to a federated version of the same thing

The fact is, hosting online discussion forums gets costly quickly, especially if you want them to be reliable.

Absolutely. I admin several AP instances, including the one I’m posting from now. We have crowd funding to help, but we are still out of pocket running it, but that’s fine, because the reason we run it is for the whole community aspect I’ve been talking about.

I have zero interest in paying out of pocket to run a generic relay that will probably end up being used by the very people I’m trying to avoid.

In mastodon, your instance can stop you from seeing content from other instances and ban users from other instances. While this moderation might be nice sometimes, I’d rather it be opt-in than mandatory. Nostr relays don’t have this power. Likewise, Mastodon instances can stop their followers from following you. Nostr doesn’t allow this.

This is exactly why I won’t use Nostr. What you’re describing here isn’t ideal for many folk that are part of marginalised groups. When each individual has to individually block every bigot only after being exposed to their bigotry, then the vulnerable folk don’t hang around. This is doubly the case when there is nothing stopping the bigots from just creating another account after burning their first one.

One question that fediverse needs to solve is: how are we going to fund hosting costs for instances and more broadly, development?

This is also something that activitypub communities do better, because they are communities not relays.

As I said, I think the only post in the community you were looking at was made before your instance was up and running and able to be pinged

The community you’re trying to subscribe to only has one post, and I believe that post may predate your instance spinning up.

It’s not really a good example of federation on Lemmy, because it doesn’t have content to federate.

Even your ping idea wouldn’t have worked here

I will never understand why people keep bringing this up as a problem, when the same thing happens on reddit, and no one ever cared.

I mean, it was just a lemmy instance someone put up. It’s not that huge a thing, and it wasn’t very popular…

There was one, but as you can see, there isn’t much of an interest in the works of bigots

Bluesky isn’t decentralized though if your description above is correct

Indignation implies that it’s about being offended or upset.

The specific term you used usually carries an implication of pettiness, and of making a big deal out of nothing. The “righteous” part is normally meant in an ironic or sarcastic way.

The fact that you equate vulnerable communities blocking instances that house hate movements that target them with righteous indignation is genuinely scary…

I don’t federate with any instance that openly houses hate groups. Threads houses hate groups.

There’s a reason for you.

It may not be enough of a reason for you, but that’s a whole different thing to there being “zero reason not to federate”