A lot of people on the "dark fedi" side stay because even though it isn't as fun, fedi stills offers them something to say. Unlike mastodon which offers you nothing at all to spend your time, not even talk and top of that it attacks you over the most petty and silly things.
Mastodon hates you having fun
there was an entire section of the article devoted to that point.
🇳🇱
Seems most of the fediverse have dug their feet in on that already. Sadly the freespeech instances have done everything in their power to convince people not to adopt that side of the fence.
Ideas like fault is pointless. Its not about who is to blame and who is to not.
The fact of the matter is the freespeech section of the fediverse has went out of their way to attack and abuse people who federate with them to the point that it is very hard to take a freespeech stance and still be appealing to most people.
I run QOTO, an instance that strongly leans towards open federation, but locally doesnt allow free speech (our users will be banned for certain forms of speech, though we are rather forgiving in this regard).
While we do sometimes have valuable interactions from free speech instances the issue is the overwhelming majority of interaction is from them dog piling and trolling with overtly racist and aggressive attacks. It is often so bad you cant even use the service without blocking most free speech instances...
Blame who you want but even an instance like QOTO that wants to remain open is struggling to do so because it just makes the service unusable.
Like i said before I am not "blamming" anyone.. Fault is a rather pointless concept... I am mearly stating that free speech is an idea I support but supporting is starting to become technically difficult causing people to adopt a non-free speech approach as its the only option that allows the fediverse to be usable for most people.
I am talking about blocking other servers, not the rules internal to your own instance.
SureI do agree there are levels to this and blocking can be quite excessive.
I mean, there is a reason you guys are still federated with... but as I said it is getting closer and closer to being impossible to maintain a nearly-open federation policy from a purely usability standpoint... we arent there yet though.
That said i am working on technological solutions.
On that point I wholly agree. We have never caved to third party pressure in that regard.
Yes I do, because while I dont think servers should force a block list on a user I do think the user should have the option to block and an easy path to do so if thats what they want. If there is a user that wants low-moderated instances blocked they should have that choice and easy access to a block list to accomplish it.
I myself dont use the block list, but I do understand its need for some users.
It is also an attempt to address the usability issue I mentioned earlier while not needing to block at the instance level... a possible middle ground solution.
I've seen it on twitter, etc
Thats a huge problem in fediverse blocklists too... I get it there are a lot of blocklists that are fairly abusive in how aggressive they are.
You're saying stuff but then the actions doesn't match
By not recommending one of the block lists that are abusive.. I can also always change my recomendation as needed if a better block list comes along.
I also tried to recommend a block list that wasnt too aggressive or ideological... just the instances that obviously are more or less unmoderated.
I have found blocking unmoderated instances do a pretty good job at significantly reducing the amount of harassment one experiences.
Sure... blocking is not a measure that will completely protect you from bad actors.. but it does go a long way to reduce most of the more casual harassment and thus make ones experience here more usable.
Curious