@hashtaggrammar @freemo

bofa.lol is a mastodon instance.
And I quote their site "Where the bofa.lol roam. A refuge for shitposting leftist birdsite exiles. Home of the Fightin' Phone Weasels."
Loud emphasis on "shitposting"

@commandelicious @hashtaggrammar @freemo I have trouble understanding people who want to silence differing opinions because it makes them uncomfortable.

Personally, I'd rather know where people stand in relation to myself. It allows dialogue. Gotta face that cognitive dissidence someday.

@Surasanji @hashtaggrammar @freemo
goto is nearly pitch perfect, good instance to be in but still has people that make me personally angry. (To explain why I hopped instances)
It's not qotos fault that I am weak and angry 8)

@commandelicious @hashtaggrammar @freemo You got a right to be where you want to be. You are under no requirement to explain yourself to anyone in that regard. You're good people, and that really is all that matters at the end of the day.

@Surasanji @hashtaggrammar @freemo
Yes, personally you might be right. But I have several example where really good people drew the short straw >.>

@commandelicious
Yea I think I know the people you are refering to as well. While they tend to be polite, they make me feel the same way. Part of what I want to do here is instead of exiling people with opinions we dont like to try to build a bridge and to make them more receptive to why their ideas are harmful.

But I understand why they may bother you. I dont think creating an echo chamber of people with just opinions we like is a good answer either.

For me personally at least this is the purpose of the mute function.

@Surasanji @hashtaggrammar

@freemo @hashtaggrammar @surasanji @commandelicious You may be better off figuring out how to limit the harm we can cause one another. Nassim Taleb's "SILVER RULE: (i.e. the negative Golden Rule, i.e., broader skin in the game: Nobody should expose others to harm for which he is not himself directly or indirectly exposed)." https://www.facebook.com/nntaleb/posts/10152179749558375

@js290
I think there is some value in that view as well. I don't think it has to be all one approach or the other though.

@hashtaggrammar @Surasanji @commandelicious

@Surasanji @commandelicious @freemo I agree with you completely, and I love to debate. However, unfortunately I do think lately, here in the US anyway, there hasn't been much distinction between "opinions" (of say, a policy matter or how to fix issues) and actual values that our country was founded on. I miss the days when I could just debate gun policy, abortion, tax policy here in the US rather than feeling like instead I'd like to remind people that marginalized groups deserve to be treated like people. That's just where I draw the line, you know?

@hashtaggrammar Can't argue with any of that. The lack of healthy debate in the USA is a good part of why i left.

@Surasanji @commandelicious

@hashtaggrammar @Surasanji
Don't go into politics Commandelicious, just don't ... :D

I am very happy to have you here @freemo
This is brain drain. And you have a beautiful one at that <3

@commandelicious
It is certainly a pleasure to have you as well. You are always welcome here and your account will be waiting should you ever choose to come back. You're family whether you leave or not :)

@hashtaggrammar @Surasanji

@commandelicious @Surasanji @freemo Well let's put it another way. I guess the contrarian in me is always at work, so another part of me is like...what if you're a pedophile and you want a safe space to talk about wanting to act on your impulses? Are we just going to be like... you do you, boo?

The line does need to be drawn somewhere, no?

@hashtaggrammar
That would violate our policy as physical harm to another. We certainly have a line and have banned people who crossed it.

@commandelicious @Surasanji

@freemo @commandelicious @Surasanji Some things are just unquestionable. I'm basically saying, I'll debate differing opinions all day long as long... as they aren't bigoted views. In real life I've had successful debates; a few months ago I even got a Vietnam Vet wearing a MAGA shirt to admit he'd vote for Michelle Obama. ;) I reject the notion that engaging with the other side is totally pointless, and I actually usually feel like a minority with that opinion in my real life.

@hashtaggrammar
Very well said, your views seem to line up very closely with my own. In the end we NEED this sort of dialogue if we have any hope of fixing the wounds society has right now.

The only alternative is screaming at each other across the aisle, each side getting progressively more violent and angry, until we have people killing and assaulting each other. Hell we are already there!

@commandelicious @Surasanji

@freemo @hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

There are certainly things which are absolutely wrong. I'm fully all for people to believe and act however they want- but the important caveat is if those actions/beliefs are of the damaging sort. If you are going to harm another or yourself, then it's something that is unequivocally wrong.

The sticking point comes, unfortunately, in the definition of harm. It's one of those "I know it when I see it" sort of things.

@Surasanji
I agree, for the most part. Not sure I agree that self-harm is wrong. While it is something we should try to prevent I do feel people have a right to self-harm if they wish without being deemed an immoral actor.

But for the most part I think we agree.

@hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

@freemo @hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

Yeah, that's why it's one of those 'I know it when I see it thing'.

For instance: Someone who is a smoker. They are harming themselves. They do not really need an intervention or anyone to step in to protect them.

However, what about the guy who wants to jump off a building in a suicide attempt? They, in that moment, truly believe what they're doing is the right course of action. I've been very close to that place, before.

I know it when I see it.

@Surasanji @freemo @hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

But can you use a person's subjective knowing-when-seeing as the rule?

I think something more objective is required so people can agree on what they know as they see and so people know themselves when they're crossing the line of acceptable discourse.

@SecondJon
Well either that or when you "see it" a moderator talks to the person first to get them to stop doing whatever the amoral act happens to be. As long as you don't insta-ban then strict codified and objective rules arent needed.

With that said not having objective rules can be a turn off to a potential new user since they dont really know if their personal expression is one that is later going to be held against them or if they will be demanded to stop later. Once they are already invested and a few thousand posts in they may not want to find out they are on the wrong instance for them.

@Surasanji @hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

@freemo
That's true. And that's a big benefit of how Mastodon is set up - we know we're here at the discretion of the moderator(s) of the instance. I joined because I thought the rules at #qoto are great - very straightforward and objective. Thanks!
@Surasanji @hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

@Surasanji
Well i think there is a difference between what is wrong and what needs an intervention.

I dont think suicide is morally wrong. It should be prevented however because I dont think it is what is best for the person, so trying to help them is a good move even if they arent morally deficient in their choice.

@hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

@freemo @hashtaggrammar @commandelicious

I don't think suicide is morally wrong, either. I'm largely amoral, to be completely honest. What is correct for one situation is not correct for a different situation.

As I've hinted before, I'm more into philosophical integrity. I like the consistency therein. I feel consistency in application of one's philosophy/morality/ethics is very important.

@Surasanji @freemo @hashtaggrammar @commandelicious without moralizing on suicide or self harm, it seems that some idiot could find it fun to make the apology of suicide or self harm. One guy once deserves support. A whole tribe of self harm advocates probablt should be banned...

@Surasanji @freemo @hashtaggrammar
My morality shall not infringe on your freedom.
(Except if so decided by the community at large (i.e. please wear clothes ...)

@commandelicious
Mob justice is exactly what we saw with wil wheaton. It doesnt work too well IMO.

@Surasanji @hashtaggrammar

I start with the belief that people are doing the best they know how for the best they know of in pursuit of, what is probably a shared goal somewhere, and those shared goals allow us to communicate.

Sadly our US politicians now sound like anonymous commenters on a polarized website; I'd like to be the opposite.

I now regularly have very enjoyable and (I think) productive discussions about politics with people who have never voted the same way as I have. I've learned and hopefully they have as well. There's much to be gained by being excellent to each other and being willing to engage rather than ban.

Of course there's a line - I've heard it called "The Overton Window", the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse; but I think we really ought to have as wide of an overton window as possible. Just because I think something is a bad idea, doesn't mean discussion of it should be banned.

If I'm not allowed to discuss my ideas, I am less likely to understand if they're wrong or could use adjustment. I may be not allowed legally or by formal banning or public shaming, or whatever, so I tend to be opposed to all of those.

@QuantumHemp @arteteco @absolutus @freemo
"Oh, someone is openly not an anarchist/communist" is reason enough for some.

@Ademan
Thanks, I try hard to be inclusive of everyone. Problem is these days inclusive is seen as oppression, so that isnt an easy task to do without pissing people off. go figure

@arteteco @absolutus

@freemo @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus I suspect that's also why Twitter/FB also just prefer to say nothing about what they really do on the inside when they decide on account punishment.

@trayofbees
Yea as an admin I can understand why. You will get shit for it no matter how "sane" the choice may be. Mob justice has the flaw that either side of any issue always tends to have its own mob.

@Ademan @arteteco @absolutus

@freemo @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus The wonder of tribalism. And when you take corrective action against any tribal mob--the victimization claims and screaming start real quick

@trayofbees @freemo @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus it also wouldn’t surprise me to know there are people here (generally the fediverse rather than specifically #QOTO) with the purpose of fragmenting things by starting fights and then trying to get instances blocked.

@realmattseymour @freemo @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus I think that's happening too. I don't necessarily think that's bad. I am not a believer that having centralized social media is sustainable. There's still plenty of active special interest phpBB boards roaming around. My octogenarian father must be a member on at least 20 boards by now

@trayofbees @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus though I currently see the strength of Mastodon being the fediverse and the ability to interact across instances. If that is prevented the platform loses its appeal to me. I guess it’s the equivalent of blocking a spamming smtp server, but who gets to decide what should be blocked.... I guess we have to trust admins on that. @freemo what’s your line for blocking an instance?

@realmattseymour
We have yet to ever block an instance. So for now its a non-issue. Only reason we might is if it is filled with spam or people who uses to it almost exclusively to avoid personal bans (opening many many accounts and harassing someone from all of it.

We would never ban an instance simply because a member of the instance has distasteful ideas.

@trayofbees @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus

@freemo
You're right. Leave individuals and their opinions to personal mutes and blocks. Only block a whole instance if they spam or exist only to cause trouble.
@realmattseymour @trayofbees @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus

@ster
Agreed. Though bofa is dangerously close to that last part "exist only to cause trouble"...

@realmattseymour @trayofbees @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus

@freemo
In all honesty I don't know the details as I haven't experienced it. It's possible lgbt.io has already blocked it.
@realmattseymour @trayofbees @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus

@ster @freemo @realmattseymour @Ademan @arteteco @absolutus Some instance admins post their blocks as a guide for other instance admins. That's problematic in some respects but only if you trust the entire list.

One of the list makers has a blocklist so long it reads like war and peace lol