It became the only reliable source of information I had. People posted links with a minimal amount of commentary, picking and choosing the best content from other social media networks. They’re not doing it to “build a brand” because that’s not a thing in the Fediverse. It’s too disjointed to be a place to build a newsletter subscription base.

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

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 44 points 10 hours ago (4 children)

Even better.

Most instances have human moderation, gating for bots, and yes, and you actually have to take 5-10 minutes to figure out how it all works, so the stupid people are automatically excluded by sheer complexity.

I fucking love Mastodon.

[–] belunos@lemmus.org 1 points 21 minutes ago

That's not the problem. The problem is how fucking slow it is. It has such few users, I see the same post in the early am as the late pm. IRL I'm an introvert, but online I'm a social fucking butterfly, and I need to give and receive attention. Also, you are highly overestimating yourself if you think dumb people can figure this out, because I'm dumb af

[–] cookiecoookie@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Stupid people can just use AI, so nothing is truly barred, not like it requires more than a 3rd grade reading level either. Your post being upvoted this much shows how easy it is for the average NPC to make an account.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 10 points 8 hours ago

Plenty of stupid people in the fediverse so I dont think we will win any prices for that, guys. And plenty of people who think they are smarter than average, and zero people who think they are dumber than average. The usual stuff.

[–] echolalia@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I know you probably didn't mean this, but I don't think accessibility barriers are good. Diversity of thought is strength and bad comments naturally sink to the bottom.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

After seeing how many terrorist ideologies have been allowed to thrive by claiming First Amendment protection since 2016.

No.

"Diversity of thought" my ass. I'm sure your wonderfully-diverse thoughts are just what all of us need to hear, but if they can't pass muster under human moderation, they're not worth platforming.

[–] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Turning to authorities to suppress fascism doesn't seem practical. We need to cultivate good democratic systems and education systems that create citizens capable of thinking critically and turning down bad ideologies on their own. Citizens should be empowered, not coddled.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

LOL

Referring to self-hosting, human moderators as "authorities" is hilarious.

I remember when, here in Missouri, the people wanted to regulate predatory payday lenders. Those opposed called their fucking organizations "Such and Such for Equal Credit Access". Sounds nice right? Almost like the term "Diversity of Thought".

What you refer to as "empowerment", I refer to as a cancer. It needs to be cut out, like they did back in the day on Cable Street.

If you feel so disempowered, go have a conversation with Grok. He'll make you feel super special.

[–] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 2 points 2 hours ago

Apologies, I think we are talking past each other. I think I misunderstood your initial comment. It read like a suggestion that lemmy's more extreme communities were terroristic and a criticism of the first amendment, which suggested that you believe the government should be allowed to dictate what kind of speech is or isn't acceptable -- in particular on these little platforms. My comment was in response to that notion.

Re-reading it with your second comment, I think you're saying that "terrorist ideologies" have been allowed to develop on conventional social-media by claiming first amendment protections in order to not moderate communities, and 2016 was not in reference to early lemmy but to the MAGA movement. That makes more sense, and I generally agree that conventional social-media follows irresponsible stewardship practices.