Louis Ingenthron @LouisIngenthron@qoto.org

@reviewer2
> you're imposing some boilerplate stereotype on me that I am not

Which parts?

> the above commitment requires doing so in transparent and democratic ways

That would be great, but it's not feasible. Content moderation at scale is a *really* hard problem (read here for more details: https://www.techdirt.com/2019/11/20/masnicks-impossibility-theorem-content-moderation-scale-is-impossible-to-do-well/). If a few people are doing it, they can be pretty cohesive, but can't be scaled. But the more people you add to the process, the less consistent the results will be, inevitably leading to accusations of unfairness and shadowbanning and the like, warranted or not.

Likewise, transparency sounds nice in theory, but in practice, it takes the nuance out of the process and forces the platform to create ever-more-rigid rules that allow trolls to skate right up to the line without crossing it, ruining the platform for the users who, through reasonable desires for transparency, are now unable to take action against the trolls.

> yes, I do think that allowing well-reasoned non-conforming positions is a prerequisite for, like, actual discussion of complex issues, that doesn't devolve into parlor talk within a local Overton window

Right, but not everybody is looking for a political salon. Some just want to discuss anime without dealing with hate speech (which is a loaded term that is impossible to fairly define, which is why we can't outlaw it in the USA, btw).

> I'm sure there was a process for deplatforming Johnstone, what was it, do we know?

Yes, there was a process. We don't know what it was, but the results speak for themselves.

Like how an instance moderates? Join or federate with it.
Don't like how an instance moderates? Block it and refuse to participate.
The benefit of plurality is that we can vote with our feet.

> saying I'd be ok with instances that don't guard against becoming "Nazi bars" is *way* overdrawn, and I'm curious where that came from

The term "Nazi bar" refers to an old maxim. Basically, it goes something like this:
A bar decides that all legally permissible speech should be allowed on its premises. At first, this is heralded as a great move for free speech, and many people come to the bar to discuss the issues of the day. However, because most bars don't allow Nazis, and this one allows all points of views, it's one of the only bars in town the Nazis can go to, so more and more Nazis start visiting it to discuss how to best genocide or whatever Nazis talk about. This turns off the non-Nazi clientele, who wanted to discuss non-genocide matters, so they stop visiting the bar. Soon, there are only Nazis left. In the end, the "free speech" bar inevitably just becomes the "Nazi bar".
That's become a metaphor for social media platforms that claim they won't moderate objectionable-but-legal speech. Inevitably, they either start moderating or they become the Nazi bar.

> Just saying - I don't expect an answer, I've taken plenty of your time. Good day.

Not at all, I enjoy the discussion. Your points are thoughtful and well-articulated.

@khalidabuhakmeh I was a CTO for a food service company for a long time and now I'm an independent software contractor/consultant.

All of that was just to pay the bills while trying to solo develop various games that never sold particularly well.

@reviewer2 If that's what you want, you should lobby the government to start a public-sector social media company, bound by laws and precedent.

Personally, I like the current model. The way that a site chooses to moderate informs me, the consumer, of its values and allows me to make an informed decision about which platform I want to participate in.

Some people, like you, want more opposing opinions, and that's fine. There are whole sites and federated instances that cater to that mentality (although, they do usually end up as Nazi bars).

But most people prefer a, for lack of a better term, safer space. They want to be able to discuss complex issues without contrarian or violent trolls butting into their replies. Some instances, on the fediverse specifically, take that way too far, in my opinion, but I recognize that they've created the space their community wants.

So long as there is a plurality of social media offerings, I think it's a very good thing that they use their powers of moderation to set themselves apart and cater to different communities. And, more importantly, their ability to do so is just more free speech.

@reviewer2 I disagree, because I think you're conflating the idea with the person presenting it.

Ideas should be discussed openly and disinfected with sunlight.

But people who continue to spread ideas that have already been debunked over and over aren't arguing in good faith. They're grifters looking for clout.

Mastodon social has a captive audience they've worked hard to build. Part of the reason they've been able to build that audience is because they made a choice to keep the grifters out (i.e. freedom of association, a key corollary to freedom of speech).

By refusing the grifters access to that audience, they're stopping their bullshit without preventing the discussion of the ideas that were presented by other users. Without a platform, it's 10x harder to build a following. So, in my opinion, anyone with such a platform has a moral duty to protect their audience from bullshit artists.

@freemo I prefer "ignorance" in that maxim, rather than "stupidity", as it implies a problem that can be fixed.

@reviewer2 She's not being silenced, she's being deplatformed.

None of these people can stop her from starting up her own mastodon instance and continuing to post her content.

All they're doing is saying "not in my house", which is their own exercise of free speech, and a repudiation in its own right.

If you cruise down the left lane of the highway below the speed limit, you might be an asshole.

If you change lanes without signalling or having adequate clearance, you might be an asshole.

If the only time you drive over the speed limit is when you see a yellow traffic light, you might be an asshole.

If you use an exit lane as a passing lane, you might be an asshole.

If you can't maintain speed of traffic *and* you can't come to a full stop at stop signs, you might be an asshole.

If you're not attentive or empathetic enough to figure these rules out, yet you continue to drive on public roads anyway, you're definitely an asshole.

I don't know why I thought I could walk around for four hours outside on a Florida afternoon without sunscreen, but I'm paying for my hubris now, let me tell you.

@forteller No, most of us just assume Germany will continue to suck at free speech ever since they refused to let Wolfenstein be released uncensored.

@SecurityWriter I'd use a web crawler to index it first and use the index to automate the download in a batch script or something.

7) I got to see the sky break itself on a beautiful Illinois farm! During the total eclipse, roosters were crowing, crickets were chirping, and the cows all started to bunch up and move towards the barn!

The ring of ethereal silver fire in the sky was pretty mind-blowing too.

6) I saw a truck with a double trailer (the kind with the hinge in the middle) completely lose control after a tire blew. After careening back and forth across two lanes of traffic trying to regain control, the structure of the back trailer gave up and burst open, spilling furniture across the highway. It was pretty spectacular, especially as it looked like nobody got hurt, but I feel sorry for that driver who had a veeeery bad day.

5) Professional truckers suck now. You used to be able to rely on their professionalism, but these days, they'll cruise in the left-hand lane at 5 under the limit and frequently look like they have to catch themselves from running off the road.

4) Trump 2024 flags/signs were shockingly rare (especially compared to 2016/2020). The few that remained looked like jury-rigged upgrades to dilapidated signs from previous election cycles.

3) Those of us who live in Florida take for granted just how good our roads are. Some states just don't give a fuck.

2) On two separate occasions, I saw several cars refuse to move over for an ambulance with lights and siren on. On both occasions, I was in a deep-south deep-red state, and the license plates of the blockers were local. Southern hospitality is dead.