Radicalisation and the Fediverse
In real life, I've seen good, sensible, compassionate people turn into racists, bigots and conspiracy theory belieivers.
Why? Because they were radicalised.
Radicalisation happens when people get exposed again and again to lies spread by extreme groups, usually about vulnerable minorities the extremists want to persecute.
It is *really* important for Fediverse admins to block this material. The further these lies spread, the greater the danger to minorities.
Radicalisation and the Fediverse
@feditips the most common example of radicalisation on fedi I've seen is caused directly by over-moderation creating echo chambers where people who think they're always 100% right saviours of the oppressed and humanity overall lash out with aggression, racism and sexism upon encountering anything that doesn't confirm their worldview, or even just casually because nobody's gonna contest them.
It's **really** important for the Fediverse admins to block only the material that **really** needs to be blocked and not just anything they don't like or agree with.
Radicalisation and the Fediverse
@sammy how on Earth is that racist? Do you consider the French a race? I fully expected the kind of people I described to go through my profile looking for anything they can over-interpret to declare me a racist/bigot in an attempt to disqualify my opinion and you still managed to surprise me.
Radicalisation and the Fediverse
@Amikke just trying to bust you out of your echo chamber 😂
Radicalisation and the Fediverse
@Amikke @feditips This actually conflicts with the intent of the Mastodon corner of the fediverse. On Mastodon, the idea is server owners can/should moderate however they like. Users then choose which server to join on that basis (and can move to a different server later if they want to).
Some allow all views, others exclude extremist views, and others may be a bubble. But that’s a deliberate feature of Mastodon, not a bug. Freedom of speech, not freedom of reach.
Radicalisation and the Fediverse
@Amikke @feditips No, it supports its ideals. Every server is free to moderate exactly as much as it chooses to. And then every user is free to join servers that apply an amount of moderation that they’re happy with.
It would, however, be against Mastodon’s ideals for someone to continue trying to interact with another person who has tried to block them.
Radicalisation and the Fediverse
@andcam @feditips I'm not trying to interact with them, I'm opposing a public tip that's terrible for the others to see. Trying to block all critique to create an illusion of lack of opposition is one of those very dangerous practices their approach to moderation advocates and we as the community have just as much of the right to publically oppose it as they have to publically post it. I'm sure you'd agree if the situation was reversed and it was a freezepeach tip to stop all moderation opposed by someone advocating for a more reasonable approach; there's a difference between personal accounts/posts and public service accounts/posts such as here.
As for moderation I don't think we disagree, we're just approaching it from different sides. Servers have complete freedom of the way they do moderation and they shouldn't be pressured either way by profiles claiming to speak on behalf of the Fediverse as a whole. What "**really** needs" moderation is subjective.
Radicalisation and the Fediverse
@Amikke I mean a cursory view of your profile just shows you being racist? https://qoto.org/@Amikke/110094392160537523
I'd argue that actually admin have a responsibility to set community rules and stick to them. There's a lot of bad faith actors out there who hide under a guise of "disrupting the echo chamber" and that's what happens on twitter right now. Lots of disruption and hate and abuse and death threats. I don't love the sound of that, not gonna lie.