this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024

140 points (85.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43952 readers

622 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

140

How good is Lemmy dealing with censorship and why does the sign-up process on lemmy.ml involve having to copy a sentence from "The Principles of Communism"? (lemm.ee)

submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by Social_Discussion@lemm.ee to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

149 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hey everyone, I'm new to Lemmy and just starting to figure this site out. I mainly moved here because of the censorship on Reddit where they didn't publish posts that included the slightest word not allowed by their filter and they removed/blocked lots of content. I wonder if it will be somewhat better here (on the official site it says "Censorship resistant - By hosting your own server, you can be in full control of your content.").

The weird thing I saw with Lemmy was when I wanted to sign-up on the "lemmy.ml" server instance that according to the official Lemmy Servers listing page is a "A community of privacy and FOSS enthusiasts, run by Lemmy’s developers".

So I thought I try that one when it's from Lemmy's own developers. When I wanted to sign-up it required an application that you needed to fill out with one of the requirements being having to copy a sentence from the link provided which links to some article called "The Principles of Communism" which I thought was very odd for a site to do. I've never seen a site like this promoting some ideology that directly where it's part of the sign-up process to almost pledge to some political or religious ideology.

This seemed very sketchy to me. Does anyone know something about this?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 18 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

If you have an email address, you're already used to the federated service pattern. When you sign up for a gmail, you're making an account with Google to be able to send emails to anyone else with an email address. And there's nothing stopping Google from making you fill out a "sketchy" application to get an account.

On Lemmy, each instance has its own set of rules, and if you don't like them, you just make an account on a different instance.

As far as censorship, each "community" (analog to subreddit) lives on a certain instance and the rules of that instance apply.

Edit: also on the topic of communism, however you feel about communism in the physical world is irrelevant when it comes to the digital world. Free and Open Source Software makes the world go 'round, and is often communist in nature, even if done unintentionally. The pattern of people developing software for their own purposes, and then sharing it freely with others is the purest form of "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need." That said, running an instance isn't free, so make sure to kick your instance a few bucks if you appreciate their work.

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca -3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Okay but implying that a given instance is the main community for Lemmy by promoting that it's run by Lemmy's developers and then making people repeat phrases from the Communist Manifesto just to make an account ain't exactly the best first impression to give, no?

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 15 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If they've been trained to immediately recoil at the word "communism", and don't understand how federated moderation works, then yes, it'll probably scare away a good number of users. But on the flip side it's not a for-profit business trying to hook DAU using predatory and emotionally exploitative patterns, so who cares about first impressions? The people who use Lemmy know why they're using it.

[+] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca -6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's not the context of the article, it's the presumption of solemn affirmation as a requirement to entry that is agregious, no?

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You're just restating what OP said. I refer you to my original post.

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, you're discussing communism specifically. I have no beef with communism or any other political ideology. Except perhaps capitalism, I might have beef with that. Digressions aside, the ask could be for quoting an article about Spongebob Squarepants and I would have the same grievance. Can we discuss the action itself, without going into a discussion about communism?

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

If you don't like SpongeBob, pick a different instance, that's federation.

To me this is like having a problem with the flags someone else has in their yard. Not your yard, not your flags. You're free to not like their flags, but if your grievance is with the action of them peacefully demonstrating free speech, that's a you problem.

Sure, maybe that guy also happens to work at the flag factory down the street. Probably explains why he has so many flags. Doesn't mean he's going to make you put the same flags he likes in your yard.

Edit: for the record, I'm not downvoting you, I think you've been very reasonable in this discussion

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I appreciate you addressing the downvoting; I had noticed the trend and it's very easy to jump to the "I'm under a personal attack" conclusion.

While I believe 107% that each instance owner can do what they want; if this given instance is the first instance to which most people will be introduced, being the closest thing to an "official" instance, should they have a duty, or at the very least, an interest, in maximizing the inclusitivity of their community?

[–] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

if this given instance is the first instance to which most people will be introduced, being the closest thing to an “official” instance, should they have a duty, or at the very least, an interest, in maximizing the inclusitivity of their community?

I think this goes back to what teawrecks said earlier:

it’s not a for-profit business

It's a private club with a trivial admission process. It's not just that they don't care about maximizing inclusivity, growth, and total users, it's that they don't want any of that. They want like-minded people and they're happy to keep out or ban people that don't fit that mold.

It feels like you're saying they should want something else, but I don't see it as obvious why they would, and I don't think you've explained your reasoning why they would.

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

You know, I never really stopped to consider the reasons for wanting unrestricted growth - after all, unrestricted growth is ultimately unsustainable. I guess I took for granted a cultural bias of my own that I really need to evaluate and see if it's something worth keeping internalized or to expunge it from myself. Guess I'm taking shrooms and doing some soul searching this weekend!

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 days ago

I would say it's one of the first, but not THE first. Lemmy.world is definitely the most popular instance (to a problematic degree).

But I don't think expressing one's love of Spongebob inherently "excludes" anyone from using Lemmy. I don't think the Lemmy devs have any duty to anyone but themselves. And any interest they have in user adoption is for their own reasons.

Nothing would stop someone from forking Lemmy and making an alternative with different ideologies. I assume the license would ask them to use a different name to not cause confusion, and I would hope that they don't break ActivityPub or federation compatibility with existing Lemmy instances. But at that point, what's the difference between a fork for ideological reasons....and just spinning up your own instance?

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

Ensure you aren't a bot I guess, and if somebody programs the paste text they can switch the text to copy from?