🇳🇱
Since it has been such a politicial issue for so many people, and people keep asking whats up, I just wanted to update everyone on the 2-month-old server submission request.
I finally got a response today, presumably from @Gargron@mastodon.social / @Gargron@tooting.ai or perhaps @sociallyeleanor@mastodon.social though I cant be certain. It was very respectful and while it did not resolve the issue it basically asked if a trans person were to join my server if he/she would have their identity questioned. Obviously since we support trans rights I expect this to move quickly.
So seems the backlog is being addressed. Of course i responded by requesting any examples where that has happened in the past (as I am not aware of any) and even provided an example where we had to suspend someone due to them being hateful towards someone of the trans community.
So hopefully we will see some movement and it wont be another 2 months to hear the response after having answered the question.
I will keep everyone updated so they can know if this was resolved. I would like to give credit where credit is due if they are legitimately catching up on this stuff. The question seemed sincere and not just a delay but we will have to wait and see. but looking a bit better I think.
And what the hell does your response to someone's identity have to do with responding to a technical request for the Mastodon code?
Oh. Right. If you're not politically correct, then everything you care about must be destroyed. That's the communist way.
For clarification this was not a request for mastodon code on my end. This was a request to be listed on the official joinmastodon.com server list. My initial e-mail went into detail on why we were in complete compliance with the rules they set forth in that request, but apparently there were some "questions".
Of course I directed at the fact that the accusation is not founded and we dont have even a single instance of a trans member who was attacked on our server that went ignored..
Been a few hours and no response after I answered the question though (I answered about 4 minutes after recieving the question).
I do hope it was a sincere attempt at resolving it and not just a delay tactic not to address the issue. But I am giving the benefit of the doubt, I think/hope it was sincere. We will see.
Ah. OK. That explains Gargron's query. He won't link to sites that don't follow the rules he sets for his. He actively works at destroying Gab, and will boot you from his instance if you even mention Gab in a positive light.
I am mostly concerned with transparency and if he lives up to his own rules.
So far the question felt a bit like an accusation based entirely off gossip without one shred of evidence (in fact our ToS which we actively up hold directly states harassment is not permitted).
I also replied asking for even a single instance where a trans person was negatively confronted on our instance that didnt result in some form of intervention. Obviously they would be unable to find a case.
So I am mostly curious to see if they actually objectively and honestly hold to their own stated (publicly) rules for inclusion in the list or not. Obviously if they make a decision based on gossip without one shred of evidence to back it up then that is very worrisome and will likely indirectly cause a lot of fall out and more popularity towards free speech instances including gab.
