There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

thecam ,
@thecam@lemmy.world avatar

In many cases it is simply censorship.

cooopsspace , (edited )

Get fucked.

It’s our right to live in a safe environment without Nazi fucks.

You have an entitlement to speech, you’re not required to be heard or listened to by me.

small44 OP ,

Who the hell talked about nazis.I’m with censoring hate speech and i don’t believe in total free speech. Did beehaw defederated with lemmy.world becauae of nazis? Yes you don’t have to listen to anybody but you have no right to decide for other what to see. That’s why i’m against defederation and with the ability of individual users to block whatever they want

WidowsFavoriteSon ,

Get over yourself.

FriendlyBeagleDog ,

I would say that for an action to be considered censorship in the strictest sense, it would need to be the suppression of information as imposed and enforced by a monopolistic authority.

If the State were to declare a book banned, that would be censorship because the State establishes itself as the single totalising authority over the people in the territory it governs. Should you contravene that ruling and possess the material in question, you’re opening yourself up to the threat of violence until you start respecting it. You’re not able to opt-out, the single authority imposes itself and its ruling on you.

Meanwhile, on federated social media there are many concurrently operating instances with different rulesets and federations. If the instance you’re part of decides to defederate with another, then you can move to another instance which continues to federate with the defederated instance in question if you’re unhappy with the decision. You’re able to opt-out of that ruling without consequence.

Plus, even if you decide not to move instance, the content hosted by the defederated instance will still be available through the instance itself.

Defederation doesn’t meaningfully suppress information, whereas censorship does.

dan1101 ,

A server operator who chooses to federate or not federate another server is well within their rights to do so. Their server, their rules. If you don’t like it just browse the defederated server yourself, no one is stopping you.

It’s like visiting someone’s house and complaining they don’t have organic coffee. If they don’t have organic coffee they aren’t stopping you from getting organic coffee, they just choose not to have it.

justlookingfordragon , (edited )
@justlookingfordragon@lemmy.world avatar

After looking through the comments here, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you just don’t understand what you’re saying, because you seem to be under the impression that “defederating” means that noone that isn’t subscribed to the defederating instance will have access to the content anymore. (e.g. Instance A cuts ties with Instance B and C so people with accounts on Instance B and C can no longer read what is published on Instance A)

This is not how it works.

You can browse all instances without even having an account on any of them so absolutely noone loses access to anything. The only thing you temporarily(!) lose is the ability to WRITE anything on the defederated instance, but you can just make an account there anytime you want.

So when Instance A cuts ties with Instance B and C, people with accounts on A can no longer WRITE anything in communities on B and C, but everyone can still READ everything, and if you happen to have an account on Instance B and want to write something on Instance A, you can just create an account there.

Spending ten seconds on creating an account is not censorship.

NightOwl ,

Yep, and Connect for Lemmy on Android has a really wonderful setting where you can browse other instances without an account and view communities that are local to it. Apps make it easier to handle accounts too now. Liftoff has been the best in that area.

db2 ,

“Boo hoo, people aren’t being forced to put up with my stupid shit, waah!”

nooneshere ,

You can try to spin it in a different way. But it’s still censorship

db2 ,

No it isn’t, kid.

BartyDeCanter , (edited )

Public Service Announcement: The Right to Free Speech means the government can’t arrest you for what you say. It doesn’t mean that anyone else has to listen to your bullshit, or host you while you share it. The 1st Amendment doesn’t shield you from criticism or consequences. If you’re yelled at, boycotted, have your show canceled, or get banned from an Internet community, your free speech rights aren’t being violated. It’s just that the people listening think you’re an asshole, And they’re showing you the door. xkcd.com/1357/

Relatedly, the people who are the most upset about censorship when no one listens to them never remember the other right that goes along with free speech: Freedom of Association. That means that you can mutually choose to listen, platform support OR NOT with whomever you wish.

Ducks ,
@Ducks@ducks.dev avatar

The word “censorship” has lost all meaning

Diprount_Tomato ,
@Diprount_Tomato@lemmy.world avatar

Just like “liberty”, “fascism”, “freedom”, “bigotry”, “woke”, “liberal”, “communist”, “nazi”, “supremacist”, “ethical”, “feminism”, “gender” and many others.

It’s easier to push a political agenda if you empty words of all meaning just to turn them into buzzwords that can mean whatever you want them to be in order to trigger outrage

SaveComengs ,

english teachers giving you marks whenever you mention feminism:

Diprount_Tomato ,
@Diprount_Tomato@lemmy.world avatar

Sorry, don’t you like it when I mention the things that you don’t agree with? Should I just have mentioned “woke” and “communist” to make you feel better?

SaveComengs ,

that’s not what I meant, I was joking about how english teachers seemingly give you free marks when you mention feminism or patriarchy

Diprount_Tomato ,
@Diprount_Tomato@lemmy.world avatar

Oh

small44 OP ,

Yes, because lot of people try to avoid complains about censorship by naming it other names

Ducks ,
@Ducks@ducks.dev avatar

Because this is not censorship. You’re free to browse any defederated community. You’re not censored, they’re not censored. All the content is perfectly viewable on the fediverse.

Go join another instance. You can’t enter somebody else’s house and complain about how they don’t want to invite the neighbor over as well. That’s not censorship. Go to the neighbors house if you want to hang out with them.

But you’ve been explained this multiple times, so I’ll leave it at this. Ignorance is not bliss.

jet ,

I’ve been thinking about this at depth. I think the public square, as we would consider the free speech zone in real life, is the closest analog to the activity pub feed itself.

As long as people have access to the activity pub protocol, they have free speech. The instances choosing to subscribe or not subscribe to that activity feed is not censorship

So if somebody received a court order saying they could no longer use activity pub, that’s clearly censorship.

Drewfro66 ,
@Drewfro66@lemmygrad.ml avatar

Yes, it is, but I’m not a Libertarian - some censorship is good. Fascists, trolls, and child pornographers deserve to be censored.

TheBananaKing ,

lolno

You can say whatever the fuck you want, but other people aren’t obliged to listen to it or pass it on.

Talk to the hand.

small44 OP ,

People aren’t obliged to listen to it but they have no right to prevent other people from seeing or hearing it unless it’s stuffs like hate speech and racism

MapleEngineer ,

No one is preventing anyone from hearing it. You are free to create an account on those instances and listen to them if you want.

jet ,

Nobody stopping them from starting their own instance, and federating with everyone else.

MapleEngineer ,

It isn’t about having something to say and being heard, it’s about having nothing to say and forcing people who don’t want to listen to listen. They’re just pissed off because the fediverse gives people the ability to exercise their right to freedom NOT to associate with them. Trolling isn’t fun without a captive audience to torture.

gizmodo.com/online-trolls-actually-just-assholes-…

small44 OP ,

You are also free to join facebook alternative yet people complains about censorship on it and defending it on lemmy. You are just hypocrites

MapleEngineer ,

Freedom of speech almost always comes with freedom of association. The thing that many people miss is that freedom of association also allows you to choose NOT to associate with someone just as freedom of religion includes freedom FROM religion. The instances choosing to defederated from the trolls are exercising their right to be free from association with the trolls. No one is stopping the trolls from spewing their nonsense or stopping anyone who wants to listen from listening.

Rhynoplaz ,

So, you’re saying that if I have a conversation with my friend, and I don’t let you listen in, THAT’S censorship? You have a problem with not being able to invade my privacy?

Sorry you got kicked out of whatever cool kids club it was, but you were not censored.

xigoi ,
@xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

The correct analogy would be someone else trying to prevent you from having a conversation with your friend.

Rhynoplaz ,

If that’s the case, then who are you unable to talk to?

xigoi ,
@xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

People are unable see content from other people that their instance has defederated with. (Yes, you can have an account on multiple instances, but that kind of defeats the point of federation.)

Rhynoplaz ,

So, the inconvenience of having to go from one openly available source of information to ANOTHER openly available source of information, is the same as an authority figure preventing someone from speaking their own opinions?

If you say so. 🤷🏻‍♂️

xigoi ,
@xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

Why should an instance get to choose what its users can read? That feels similar to a government deciding what their citizens can read.

Rhynoplaz ,

But they aren’t. You can go see it.

That’s like complaining about not being able to talk to your buddy across the street because you don’t want to walk over there. God damn city put this street here and it’s standing between me and my conversation!!!

fr0g , (edited )

People not wanting to engage with other people is not censorship. Nobody is entitled to someone else’s attention.

NightOwl ,

Not really. These aren’t monetized sites, but just individuals inviting guests to use their instance over self hosting their own, and there’s other instances people can move to.

Each instance is better seen as individual forums than a reddit type centralized site. Some forums allows cross account logins, and some you have to create another account. And defederation doesn’t cause that instance to cease to exist like banning a community or subreddit does.

abbadon420 ,

You could also say it’s a form of tribalism

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines