this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2026
816 points (93.2% liked)
Microblog Memes
10249 readers
3369 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
RULES:
- Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
- Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
- You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
- Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
- Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If a post is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
- Be nice. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements to private messages.
- No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just because an account got verified doesn't mean Bluesky agrees with them
Verify it, then put a warning along the lines of
"This is the official profile of a fascistic terrorist organization. Beware."
Yeah, that makes sense. But why just verify? What non-evil is there that you achieve with that?
It gives those who're gonna have a field day with those cunts when they start lying, a legit target, and that it's not some asshat that is pretending to be ICE. I'm on bluesky and somewhat delighted they're going to have a presence. I'm gonna have fun ripping them new assholes.
What kind of zinger are you planning to drop that will make the intern running the ice account recoil and quit their job?
Oh, just general nastiness that befits America's homegrown brownshirts. It won't be for them so much as for anyone else reading their posts.. You just get in front of the lies and call them all out.
The verification doesn't work like on Twitter, it's just proving the identity, it's not some flag of prominence.
There's even multiple organizations who can issue verifications on bluesky, for example newspapers can act as verifiers of their own staff;
https://bsky.social/about/blog/04-21-2025-verification
I did understand that :)
But still: Verifying means you officially acknowledge their existence. And they are horrible pieces of shit; thereby acknowledging their existence should automatically include making the facts visible. There's no reason not to call evil evil.
EDIT: Also, your comment was well-written and I have no need to actually argue against you. So, do not worry. I do not completely agree with you, but my disagreement is not terribly strong either :)
When I'm showing people the kind of shit this administration posts as an argument against them, I want to know it's real.
And I don't want to have to be on Nazi Twitter to do that any more than I have to.
They shouldn't be allowed onto the platform at all. Don't verify them, ban them.
I’d rather the platform not be in charge of who’s allowed to use it. Yeah ICE sucks, but that’s not for the platform to decide.
If they break the rules of the platform, that’s a different story.
The platform is always in charge of who's allowed to use it. They already ban people and censor certain types of speech. This is a discussion about where the line is, not if its been drawn at all.
They ban people for actions they take outside the platform?
Go and post about your plans to grab a few of your armed buddies and go terrorize, beat, and even kill some minorities and see if you’re allowed to keep your account.
That's not how any of this works. Bluesky isn't an agnostic protocol like http or a piece of paper. It's a private platform, with arbitrary rules. Arbitrary rules that apparently do not prohibit ice.
It means that a little more than it means they disagree with them.
ICE are masked jackboot thugs illegally deployed to our streets by a psychopathic rapist to punish people who don’t vote for him. If there is ever a time to resist tyranny….
“Welcome. Let’s see what you have to say” is not an appropriate reaction to their presence.
Who the fuck cares if "they" agree with them or not.
ICE is a fascist appendage and should not be allowed on any "public discourse" platform.
You know what sends a message you don't agree with someone? Banning their arses.
You know what implicitly shows you agree with someone? Not stopping them, and ensuring they’re legitimised by your system.
What BlueSky is now is a ~~Nazi~~ ICE bar.
Yes it does. It means they are okay enough with them to not ban them.
Surely there are some things that warrant a ban on bluesky. There's some sort of line beyond which you are not welcome. We can infer from this verification that ice is on the safe side of the line.
I'm sure there's at least one marxist that's verified on bsky, does that mean jack dorsey is a communist?
It would mean that communism is acceptable to him. What's tripping you up here?
So does that mean Dorsey is a nazbol since he agrees with both communists and fascists? There are neoliberals on bluesky as well, how does that affect our triangulation of his beliefs? I'm not saying you have to agree with how the company moderates its platform, but clearly as far as bluesky is concerned allowing someone to use the platform is not an endorsement of their views. It can't be, because they allow people with diametrically opposing ideologies to use their platform.
Allowing them on the platform doesn't mean a full endorsement of the belief. It means that he (or whoever makes the decision) finds the belief acceptable enough to platform.
There is likely some line which is too far, and not allowed on the platform. Perhaps "eating live babies"? "Kicking puppies"? Something that is so unacceptable, it would not be allowed. This argument is that ICE and Nazi stuff belongs on the far side. That as a platform owner, you can say "that's not allowed here".
Allowing one person to say "I think the NY Yankees are the best" and another to say "I think the NY mets are the best" on your platform (eg: website, newspaper, bulletin board) doesn't mean that you personally believe both. But if you let someone post "I think white people are best" and just leave that up, that's saying that's an acceptable message to say. Just harmless like talking about baseball.
This argument is some positions, like what ICE is doing, is outside the range of acceptable. The platform (a website in this case) should say they have to take that elsewhere.
I have zero disagreements with this comment. My read of the top level comment was pretty literal, which is a tendency I have that gets me into trouble sometimes.
Just a quick side-note: Dorsey is no longer in charge of Bluesky
Jay Graber is
clearly my commitment to showing my entire ass online is easy for me to stick to
Narrator: in fact they did agree with them, for the money was green and did flow and in the end that was all that mattered to them
Mastodon was always the only real choice
Bsky users are mad for saying the truth. They'll find out soon enough when it gets bought by some billionaire. Then, after leaving twitter and bluesky, they go onto birdpoo or something and tell themselves "this time will be surely different!".