Some of us are hanging out to interact with peers and to share cool hacks. Nothing to do with winning or losing; not all social interactions can be reduced to a psychological warfare.
.. I've started to view people in two categories: those who want to have a discussion, and those who want to win a discussion.
The former group doesn't care about popularity, just the free exchange of ideas with the intent of forming a new understanding.
The latter group needs a stage and a megaphone, and measures the success of their beliefs by how many people they can get applauding, even if it's just a fraction of the entire audience.
I stay clear of the latter.
This guy doesn't understand the Fediverse.
I got banned for racism because I didn't like someones post about whiteness.
So the Fediverse is a fake community like all the rest of them.
> I got banned for racism because I didn't like someones post about whiteness.
Unless you’re saying you were banned for not favouriting someone’s post (which is literally unbelievable), there’s something missing in that story. You don’t even mention if the post was pro, against, or neutral. I understand not wanting to dox yourself, but being too sparse on details doesn’t look good for your assessment either.
> So the Fediverse is a fake community like all the rest of them.
The fediverse is not a single community but a collection of communities, that is the whole point. You can move around and find the right server for you.
Nah I got banned for saying idiots race baiting white people is why Democrats are always down 5-10% with white voters.
You may want to consider how this all sounds to an outsider.
I have seen a large number of otherwise presenting as perfectly normal fediverse instances about normal topics, where if you scroll down in the rules, the last rule is "being racist against whites is not against the rules" or sometimes phrased "reverse racism is not real" or "reports about people expressing their pain towards groups such as whites and men will be ignored"
That's the truth of the context we're dealing with here, the pendulum has swung far enough that racist lunatics are incredibly common in positions of power on these instances.
Here is one example i found in 5 minutes, this is the first result for "academic mastodon" in search engines.
> Users of Scholar Social are expected to have the literacy to understand that "reverse discrimination" is not real, and so attempts to re-centre discussions of marginalized people around the feelings of the privileged will be taken as manipulative behaviour undertaken deliberately in bad-faith. (E.g. white people should not demand that people of colour put CW's on every discussion of race; a straight person who reports a queer person for writing "I hate straight people" may find their own account suspended.)
Like, whoever wrote this is a blatant bigot, and yet most of the high profile mastodon instances are run by people like this.
There is a lot of context for that you may want to consider reading up on, but I doubt you have interest, so why get angry? There is more than one instance to chose from. That community clearly isn't for you. It's a decentralised network with various niches. You don't have to engage with everyone. It's not Twitter.
There is no defense or context whatsoever that justifies racial, gender or sexuality based hatred being directly defended and encouraged in the rules of a community.
I also find it interesting, last post you were suggesting people consider the perspective of an uninformed outsider. Now it's "Oh there's context inside the community". Take your own advice.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/apr/20/the-invention-o...
Try to do something more than just react blindly to what people are saying, it makes for an unhappy life.
Do you have a point you're making beyond there being a long history of racism in humankind? We know. The choice is to end it or continue it. You appear to choose to continue it, though you seem to be afraid of elaborating beyond one sentence even as you re-edit your post 3 times.
Honestly I think going back to basics and just thinking about how prejudice affects individual people at the most fundamental level would do you a ton of good.
If you ban people because you disagree with them then you don't have a community.
Oh, I disagree with plenty of people on there but I've found several communities on there which have helped me offline as well.
Yes you do. Communities by definition have mores and norms that members of that community are expected to understand follow, and violating those can lead to one being chastised or expelled from the community. That's the way human social networks have operated since paleolithic times.
Allowing everyone and everything, all the time, is the exact opposite of a community, it's simply a crowd. But even in a crowd, there are limits to what people will put up with.
Not really, there are plenty of communities with diverse opinions as well.
And just like in real life, belonging to a community or group may require you to be aligned to a certain mindset/opinion that is important to the group.
Fediverse is BBS's. I loved the entire time of BBS's, both consciously at the time and now in retrospect, somehow, despite there being no thought of it's general popularity or winning or whatever.
"Fork it" or "patches welcome" is not hacker for go fuck yourself. It can be, but that is up to the speaker in each specific instance, and if this article is how this person thinks then perhaps it often is when spoken to them.
There seems to be an influx of anti-fediverse style post/articles lately.
Is there a reason for this ?
On point.
Exactly.
> covid
I don't understand this part. The people who left X after Musk's takeover seem to be mostly people who were on the winning side of Covid, i.e. the side that used the state and media apparatus to coerce people to participate in a medical experiment.