Olives @olives@qoto.org

It's not like it's telling them to do anything particularly good. It's a group of out of touch people advancing oppression under the guise of putting everyone into the padded cell of "safety".

Also, wasn't Nadine the one giving people the middle finger and hurling violent abuse at a journalist on social media?

To be fair, the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrat Party seem better.

A few years ago, British Digital Secretary, Nadine Dorries, spoke about how Britain was going to lead the Internet, and show the rest of the world how it is done.

Like other parts of Brexit, it is hard to escape this idea that Britain has never really gotten over the fact that they no longer control a vast empire, and think they're entitled to tell everyone else how to do things.

After several years of research, I wrote that, I think it captures the essence of fediverse oriented safetyism.

Does it have to be the fediverse?

I've seen the "safe space" theory of the fediverse. The idea the fediverse is this place someone "retreats to", and you can use other platforms as the "actual serious platform". I don't find this compelling though. First off, it limits the potential of the fediverse to being entirely about being some sort of "holiday retreat", not as a serious social media platform to be used to escape from the grips of yet another Big Tech company.

This seems like something better suited to something like a traditional forum, or perhaps, Discord (or if you prefer a free alternative, perhaps, something like XMPP or Matrix). However, there are likely other solutions which don't involve federation. I've seen a few over the years. Such a community could be more tightly curated, and someone doesn't even have to be as itchy or jumpy in their moderation. Or to rely on third party gossip. Is the fediverse the right answer here?

As some have already pointed out too, admins themselves might have issues. A few even appear to have narcissistic tendencies[1]. There also seems to be a streak of "high school drama" which you don't typically see as much with other federated networks, although it is not a phenomena I have not seen in website administration. Typically, I've see such behaviors from teenage community administrators, although to a lesser extent, others as well. We also know there are certain contexts which are susceptible to particularly toxic people.

We have to remember that sometimes there are some tools which are better in some situations[2]. If a hammer doesn't work well, then perhaps, a better option is to use something else. And perhaps, there are situations where federation works better, contrary to some opinions [3].

1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism

2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument

3 https://fieldnotes.resistant.tech/federation-is-the-worst-of-all-worlds/

As a rule of thumb, there is no such thing as "strict" or "purely unforgiving" moderation without it getting oppressive / unpleasant for users. And that is not simply knowledge from the fediverse.

Here's an ironic fediverse event I saw.

Someone was going on about how there should be "strict moderation". Weeks later, that user said something which rubbed a mod the wrong way and got suspended.

While I try to avoid being one of those free expression people who only ever covers some country in Africa violating someone's free expression or privacy, since this came up on my radar, I'll cover it.

https://techcentral.co.za/south-africa-spying-law-is-deeply-flawed/239456/

"In early 2021, the constitutional court found that the country’s State Security Agency, through its signals intelligence agency, the National Communication Centre, was conducting bulk interception of electronic signals unlawfully."

"The court found that there was no law authorising the practice of bulk surveillance and limiting its potential abuse. It ordered that the agency cease such surveillance until there was.

In November 2023, the South African presidency responded to the ruling by tabling a bill to, among other things, plug the gaps identified by the country’s highest court. The General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill sets out how the surveillance centre, based in Pretoria, should be regulated."

"In the case of South Africa, around 2005, rogue agents in the erstwhile National Intelligence Agency misused bulk interception to spy on senior members of the ANC, the opposition, business people and civil servants. This was despite the agency’s mandate being to focus on foreign threats."

#privacy

If they evolve their policies (i.e. fix the weird Q stuff), then I might give it more credit as a Silicon Valley powered Twitter lookalike. I still won't pretend it is federated, or some "open" thing, because it isn't.

There is the theoretical benefit that Bluesky might be less subject to the whims of one admin after it "decentralizes". However, currently it very much *is* subject to the whims of one admin (well, whoever works at that company).

The British Government can also be fairly "our problem is your problem". Like, in a case, where they complained about how cops supposedly historically called victims liars when they went to them.

Hang on, *you* are the ones who did this, what does it have to do with anyone else.

HOA and admin drama rearing it's ugly head again.

https://edri.org/our-work/health-digital-rights-organisations-and-trade-unions-to-the-council-of-the-eu-uphold-patients-fundamental-rights-in-the-ehds/

"13 organisations and trade unions representing patients, medical professionals, persons with disabilities, consumer and digital rights, are urging the Council of the EU to uphold European patients’ fundamental rights and agree on the right for opting out of the primary and, in particular, secondary use of medical records in the European Health Data Space (EHDS) for all people in the EU."

Frankly, an opt-out doesn't go far enough, it should be an opt-in, although I understand they're trying to stop it getting even worse. #privacy #ehds

Checking, and yup, Dr. Ferguson is still sceptical of the moral panic surrounding minors and social media.