We will be banning Gab domains in the next version (v0.9.5) due for release in the next few days.

#pixelfed

Follow

@pixelfed There seems to be an effort (one I have been discussing contributing to as well) to fork all the fediverse apps that include hard blocks.

Basically have the fork follow the upstream exactly, just with blocks removed.

Id be really curious to hear what your thoughts are on that movement and what your opinion might be of those groups.

As someone who wants to help contribute to that effort I also would hope you wouldnt see it as a hostile act, as I certainly support your project and appreciate your contributions.

@dansup@mastodon.social @dansup@pixelfed.social

@freemo @pixelfed @dansup It is not a hard block, you can remove the domain block in the configuration.

@dansup@mastodon.social
Ahh so it will just be implemented as a default configuration line? That seems fair then. Not a tactic I'd personally choose but nothing I'd complain about either.

Open-source means free, as in choice :)

@pixelfed @dansup@pixelfed.social

@dansup I think it is a good compromise. A hardocoded block would have been negating the software neutrality, which, whatever the content being blocked, is not acceptable imho. Setting the block as a default config is a clear stance from the developer ( which I agree with in this case ), but leaves room for the user to make their own choice in conscience.

@patricepoly @dansup "software neutrality".

There's no such thing as software neutrality; every piece of software makes political choices in choosing licensing, choosing which users to support, choosing which features to implement, choosing how to distribute the software. All of those choices makes it harder or easier for some groups to use the software.

Choosing the "status quo" of supporting everyone including fascists is still a political choice.

@zatnosk @dansup You are very right, thank you for bringing light on this. I suppose my idea was that the choice of supporting everyone including the ugly is essential if we want to advocate freedom of speech.

@patricepoly @dansup I believe freedom of speech is entirely unrelated to this. Freedom of speech is a freedom to express your opinions and beliefs, it doesn't grant you the right to have other people aid you in expressing it.

Making software that excludes a select group of people can't be in conflict with freedom of speech when not using the software doesn't harm you. And in this case it's free software AND there are alternatives available.

@zatnosk @dansup
I think you just illuminated why I'm uncomfortable with this.
.
It isn't "free speech" when I dislike $EXCLUDED_GROUP, but what about when people I like are added to $EXCLUDED_GROUP?
Having said that, developers should be thinking about Gab's "wolf in sheep's clothing" tactics (and others that will surely follow) and how that endangers the distribution of all Fediverse mobile apps.

Free speech, fascists, bigotry 

@lnxw48a1 @dansup then it still isn't about free speech. There are other human rights than free speech, and in this case there's nothing morally wrong with excluding fascists and supporters of fascists - because we're excluding based on words and actions. If you're not acting like a fascist, then you're welcome many places.

If you exclude people based on skin color or birth place then it's bigotry and a whole other discussion.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.