150

Why lemmy.world should not defederate from beehaw.org. (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by FantasticFox@lemmy.world to c/lemmyworld@lemmy.world

204 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What defederating would mean:

We won't see beehaw.org posts/comments on other instances.

Pros:

There is less confusion, you can't respond to a beehaw.org user, thinking they will be able to see your response when in reality they cannot.

Cons:

We won't be able to see any beehaw.org comments/posts on other instances, so we will miss out on some comment threads and posts. It could be good to be able to see them and interact with the other users there even though beehaw.org users won't see any of our content.

Summary

Overall, I think it is better not to defederate, but simply unsubscribe from all of their communities (and as we no longer get posts from their instance, with time these will cease to appear on our 'front page').

beehaw.org users already can't see our posts/comments anywhere so it's not like defederating would change their experience in any way, so it wouldn't really be retaliation and would just limit the content available to lemmy.world users.

What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] kresten@feddit.dk 24 points 1 year ago

I still don't understand the decision beehaw made

[+] RedMarsRepublic@lemmy.world -39 points 1 year ago

They're liberals that can't handle any disagreements.

[-] bibeoboy@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

It's been explicitly clear that beehaw's very few moderators would protect their users from bigots spreading hate online. It sucks that better defederation options don't exist yet within the platform but to boil down to softy liberals is so lazy and part of the problem.

[-] GONADS125@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

The problem is the bigots are so stupid and deluded that they don't perceive their actions as hate, but rather justified politically motivated actions. Then they turn around and misconstrue their hate as protected speech or political protest. They're too dumb or willfully ignorant to even comprehend the difference between hate and healthy discourse.

[-] RavenFellBlade@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

It isn't stupidity or ignorance. It's a deliberate tactic used in bad faith. It's the tactic of "I'm not racist but..." before spewing racist garbage. They know their arguments are bigoted and hateful, but they also believe it doesn't matter because their targets are subhuman and not worthy of protection of any kind.

[-] GONADS125@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

What I meant was that they are stupid for falling into such ignorant beliefs, and delusional in their justification for their actions. Yes, they know they're racist. But they believe they are somehow morally justified (and some morally compelled!) to harrass others.

I was being tongue-in-cheek, but I agree with you and that's what I was trying to allude to.

[-] Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyi 3 points 1 year ago

Id say its a bit of both.

There are definitely people who don't think what they are saying is bigoted due to ignorance or failure to understand why what they say is hurtful or wrong - i've met a fair few.

There are also people who know that its bigoted, and refuse to care because believe their bigotry is justified, despite the harm that it causes. - i've also met some people like that.

Neither of which should be tolerated, though.

[-] RedMarsRepublic@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago

Nobody has even shown any evidence of what posts are so disruptive and you're completely ready to boil it down to 'they believe their targets are subhuman'.