this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
977 points (96.6% liked)

Meta (lemm.ee)

3590 readers
15 users here now

lemm.ee Meta

This is a community for discussion about this particular Lemmy instance.

News and updates about lemm.ee will be posted here, so if that's something that interests you, make sure to subscribe!


Rules:


If you're a Discord user, you can also join our Discord server: https://discord.gg/XM9nZwUn9K

Discord is only a back-up channel, !meta@lemm.ee will always be the main place for lemm.ee communications.


If you need help with anything, please post in !support instead.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Hey folks

I have been receiving a lot of messages every single day about federation with hexbear. Some of our users are vehemently against it, others are in full support. The conversation does not seem to be dying down, rather, the volume of messages I receive about it seems to be increasing, so I am opening this public space where we can openly discuss the topic.

I am going to write a wall of text about my own thoughts on the situation, I’m sorry, but no tl;dr this time, and I ask anybody participating in this thread to first read through this post before commenting.

Before I go any further, I want to be clear that for anybody who participates here, it is required to focus on the quality of your posts. That means:

  • Be kind to each other, even if you disagree
  • Use arguments rather than calling people names
  • Realize that this is a divisive topic, so your comments should be even more thoughtful than usual

With that out of the way, there are a few things I want to cover.

On defederation in general

First of all, I am a firm believer that defederation must be reserved only for cases where all other methods have failed. If defederation is used liberally, then a small group of malicious users can effectively completely shut down the federated network, by simply creating the type of drama between instances which would inevitably result in defederation. In my view, federation is the biggest strength of Lemmy compared to any centralized discussion forum, so naturally I think maintaining federation by default is an important goal in general.

I am also a believer in the value of deplatforming hateful content, but I think defederation is not the best way to do this. Banning individual users, banning communities and establishing a culture of mutual support between mods and admins of different instances should be the first line of defense against such content. There are some further steps that can be taken before defederation as well, but these are not really documented anywhere (in order to prevent circumvention). The point is: for myself, defederation is the absolute last resort, only to be used when it is completely clear that other methods are ineffective.

Finally, I am wary of creating a false expectation among lemm.ee users that lemm.ee admins endorse all users and communities and content on instances we are federated with. Here at lemm.ee, we use a blocklist for federation, which means our default apporach is to federate with all new instances. We do not have the resources (manpower, skills and knowledge) necessary to pass judgement on all instances which exist out there, as a result, users on lemm.ee are expected to curate their own content to quite a high degree. In addition to downvoting and/or reporting as necessary, individual lemm.ee users are also able to block specific users and communities, and the ability to block entire instances is coming very soon as well.

Having said all that, in a situation where all other methods do indeed fail, defederation is not out of the question. Making such a call is up to the discretion of lemm.ee admins, and doing it as a last resort is completely in line with our federation policy.

Regarding hexbear

Hexbear is an established Lemmy instance, focused on many flavors of leftism. They have quite a large userbase who are very active on Lemmy (often so active that they leave the impression brigading all popular Lemmy posts). One important thing to note is that while some forms of bigotry seem to be quite accepted by many hexbear users (but seemingly not by mods - more on that below), they at least are very protective of LGBT rights (and yes, I am quite certain that they are not just pretending to do this, as many users seem to believe). Additionally, while I have noticed quite high quality posts from hexbear users, there are also several users there who seem to really enjoy trolling and baiting (very reminiscent of 4chan-type “for the lulz” posting), and it’s important to note that this kind of posting is in general allowed on hexbear itself.

The reason this whole topic is important to so many people right now (despite hexbear being a relatively old instance), is that hexbear only recently enabled federation. A combination of their volume of posts, their strong convictions, the excitement about federation, and the aforementioned trolling has made them very visible to almost all Lemmy users, and this has sparked discussions about the value of federation with hexbear on a lot of Lemmy instances.

My own experience with hexbear

I want to write down my own experience with interacting with hexbear users, mods, and admins over the past few days. I believe this experience will highlight why I am hesitant to advocate for immediate full defederation from hexbear at this point in time, and am for now still more in favor of taking action on a more individual user basis. Please read and see how you feel about the situation afterwards.

Background

My first real contact with hexbear users was in the comments section of a post in this meta community requesting defederation from hexbear by @glimpythegoblin@lemm.ee. That post is now locked, because several hexbear users very quickly started doing the aforementioned “for the lulz” type spamming of meme images in the comments (these are actually just emojis, but they are rendered as full-size images on all instances other than the source instance, due to a current Lemmy bug).

I did not want to take further actions in that thread in general (for archival purposes), but I did take one action, which in retrospect was a mistake: I removed a comment which contained the hammer and sickle symbol. I ignorantly associated this symbolism with Kremlin propaganda, and the atrocities my own people suffered at the hands of the soviet union during the previous century. Many users (including hexbear users) correctly (and politely) pointed out to me in DMs that the symbol has a much broader use than just as the symbol of the USSR, and people elsewhere in the world may not associate it with the USSR at all. I am grateful for users who pointed this out to me without resorting to personal attacks.

Let me be clear here: while I do not have anything against leftism or communist ideas in general (in fact in today’s world, I think discussion of such ideas is quite necessary), Kremlin propaganda has no place on lemm.ee. Any dehumanizing talking points of the Kremlin on lemm.ee are treated as any other bigotry, and if communist symbolism is used in context of Kremlin propaganda (that is the context in which I have been exposed to it throughout my whole life), then it will still be removed. But there is no blanket ban on communist symbolism in general on lemm.ee, and discussing and advocating for leftist and communist topics (as distinct from the imperialist and dehumanizing policies of the Kremlin) is certainly allowed on lemm.ee.

Hexbear user response

Coming back to the events of the past few days: soon after my removal of the comment containing the symbol from the meta thread, two posts popped up on hexbear. One was focused on insulting and spreading lies about me personally. Another was focused on diminishing the horrors of the soviet occupation in my country. In the comments under both of these posts (and in a few other threads on hexbear), I noticed some seriously disturbing bigotry against my people. There were comments which reflected the anti-Estonian propaganda of the current Russian state, things like:

  • Suggesting that my people has no right to exist
  • Stating that my people (and other Baltic nations) are subhuman
  • Claiming that anybody critical of both nazi and soviet occupations is themselves a nazi and a holocaust denier

I expect to hear such statements from the Russian state - here in Estonia, we are subjected to this and other kinds of bigotry constantly from Russian media - but to see it spread openly in non-Russian channels is extremely disturbing. Such bigotry is completely against lemm.ee rules in general. Additionally, my identity is public information, because I feel it’s important for the integrity of lemm.ee that I don’t hide behind anonymity. Considering this, I’m sure you can understand why I am very worried about my own safety when people leave comments in many unrelated threads (where my original posts are not even visible), baselessly calling me a nazi and a holocaust denier.

Note that the goal of this post is not to start a new debate in the comments about the the repressions of the soviet union in Estonia or other occupied territories, but if the topic interests any users, I can recommend the 2006 documentary The Singing Revolution (imdb). The trailer is a bit cheesy, but the actual film contains lots of historical footage from the soviet occupation, and also many interviews with people who experienced it, who share stories which are deeply familiar to all Estonians. If anybody is interested in further discussion, then I suggest making a post about it in the Estonian community here: !eesti@lemm.ee.

Hexbear admin response

After the above events had played out, I reached out to hexbear admins for clarification on their moderation policies and how they handle such cases. I was actually very happy with their response:

  1. They immediately removed the personal attacks and dehumanizing comments containing Kremlin propaganda from Hexbear, and assured me that such content is always handled by mods
  2. They told me that while there are all kinds of leftists on hexbear, Russian disinformation is generally either refuted in comments or removed by mods
  3. They implemented some additional rules on hexbear to try and reduce the trolling experienced by many other instances, including ours: https://hexbear.net/post/352119
My personal take-aways

Let me play the devil’s advocate here and employ some “self-whataboutism”: among all users that have been banned on lemm.ee for bigotry, the majority were actually not users from other instances, and in fact people with lemm.ee accounts. If we judge any larger instance only by bigoted posts that some of its users make, then we might as well declare all instances as cesspools and close down Lemmy completely. I believe it’s far more useful to judge instances based on moderation in response to such content. Just as we remove bigoted content from lemm.ee, I have also witnessed bigoted content being removed from hexbear.

At the same time, I am aware of some internal conflict between hexbear users over the more strict moderation they are now starting to employ, and I am definitely keeping an eye on that situation and how admins handle it.

I am also still quite worried about the amount of distinct users on hexbear who have posted Kremlin propaganda. I so far don't have reason to believe that these users are employed by the Russian state, but the fact that they are spreading the same hateful content which can be seen on Russian television seems problematic to say the least, and it remains to be seen if moderators can truly keep up with such content.

Where thing stand right now

I am not convinced that we are currently at a point where the “last resort” of defederation is necessary. This is based on the presumption that our moderation workload at lemm.ee will not get out of hand just due to users from that particular instance. My current expectation is that as the excitement of federation calms down (and as new rules on hexbear go into effect), the currently relatively high volume of low effort trolling will be replaced by more thoughtful posts. If this is not the case then we will certainly need to re-evaluate things.

Additionally, nothing is changing about our own rules regarding bigotry. Especially relevant in the context of Kremlin propaganda, I want to say that dehumanizing anybody is not allowed on lemm.ee (hopefully I do not have to spell it out, but this of course includes Ukrainians, LGBT folks, and others that the Kremlin despises), and action will be taken against any users who do this, regardless of what instance they are posting from.

Finally, I am very interested to hear thoughts and responses from our own users. I am super grateful to anybody who actually took the time to read through this massive dump of my own thoughts, and I am very interested to get a proper understanding of how our users feel about what I’ve written here. Please share any thoughts in the comments.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] booty@hexbear.net 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Can you define "russian disinformation" please? Does it just mean "any opinion about the Ukraine war that the BBC doesn't air?"

[–] socsa@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Exactly what I thought. It's exactly this kind of weasel word equivocation I figured the admins would be hiding behind when they made that statement. And I pretty much assumed one you would jump in and say it out loud.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 34 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Are you afraid to answer the question, or simply unable? Do you even have a definition for "russian disinformation" or is it just something you use to dismiss anything you disagree with?

[–] socsa@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The whole point is to exploit the imprecise nature of the topic to straddle a moral line. The disinformation space benefits from precisely this kind of nihilism because it can argue semantics at a whim, because it has no fixed beliefs. Sartre said it better tbh.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Asking you to define the terms you use is "arguing semantics?" How can we possibly have a conversation if you're using undefinable weasel words?

[–] natanael@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You know all your questions have been answered before, you're just pretending otherwise.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have never heard a satisfying definition of the term in question, and that is because there isn't one. It is used broadly against anything liberals don't like. It's like "woke" or "tankie." It doesn't mean anything.

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Like "liberals" you throw around. Hypocrisy runs deep in your community. (look I can also employ the us versus them super smart trickery! We are so smart, they are so dumb, let's laugh at them!)

[–] booty@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, liberals are people who support capitalism. It might not be a 100% perfect definition but it's the one I use. Now you know the definition of my term, how about you define yours?

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Words only have meaning if their definition is agreed upon. My definition follows this description:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

I'm sure you'll make up more crap, your own words and definitions to weaponize, honing your "posting skills", dunking all the way to... Valhalla? All the while making no difference.

[–] thoro@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The literal first two concrete policies in the opening paragraph of that article defining liberalism are private property and market economies.

Guess what the literal two defining features of capitalism are.

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Are they unique to capitalism?

[–] thoro@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Care to enlighten me on the other economic systems that have private property and a market economy?

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

In whatever you call the systems of nearly every corner of the modern world. Because they are all hybrids and usually contain some degree of these elements. Discussion pure versions of any economic system is an academic exercise and only tangentially related to reality.

[–] Flaps@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thank you for showing us you know next to nothing yet are proud of your ignorance

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Flaps@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] booty@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's not a definition, that's an extremely thorough article about liberalism.

Words only have meaning if their definition is agreed upon

I mean you really don't have to agree, you just have to understand. It doesn't matter what you think the definition of liberal should be as long as you know what I mean when I say it. And now you do. So, how about you define your terms now so that there can be effective two-way communication? As it stands, the communication only goes one way. You understand me, but I don't understand you. That doesn't seem very fair. From the article you linked:

Through all these strands and traditions, scholars have identified the following major common facets of liberal thought:

  • believing in equality

Please resolve the inequality present in this conversation.

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I provided a less vauge defintion than you. How am I to understand a defintion that is no more than a quip?

[–] booty@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What? Do you look in the dictionary to find exhaustive encyclopedia articles about topics? Do you need me to define capitalism too, is that why my definition is too vague? Do you need me to define "support?" What part of my definition are you confused about?

If someone asks you what a tuque is, are you unsatisfied until you have talked about the Welsh town of Monmouth and the methods they used in the 15th century to stitch caps? Or would you tell them that it's a knit fucking cap

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Many non-liberals support capitalism. Ipso facto your definition is useless and obviously has meaning to you beyond the quip. Words are fun!

[–] thoro@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The people you may refer to as conservatives are, generally, also liberals using literally that same Wikipedia article and the classical definition of the word.

The modern dominant economic system in the world is called neoliberalism. It was first made popular by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. It was continued by Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, and now Biden.

Do not confuse the politico landscape with academic definitions.

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

Yep, I'm in compete agreement on neoliberalism.

Do not confuse the politico landscape with academic definitions.

My guess is we disagree on which makes a difference in the world, Not you personally (I just don't know), but I usually find Marxism a refuge for those disconnected from reality. It's so boring, having been hashed out enumerable times. Plus it has never existed in reality, and never will because it does not account for realities of human nature.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Many non-liberals support capitalism

Which ones do you have in mind? I'm not even saying you're wrong, I can think of examples myself. (I did say it wasn't a 100% perfect definition) Nevertheless, it is still the definition I truly use. If I saw someone defending capitalism I would call them a liberal regardless of whether it was 100% accurate.

[–] MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Why not call them capitalists? Seems more direct and less dog-whistle-ish.

[–] ProxyTheAwesome@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then why not copy and paste an actual answer if you have had this conversation before and stop weaseling?

[–] natanael@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Do I have to keep a library of links around just for you? Lol no

[–] MolotovHalfEmpty@hexbear.net 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Two users in the same post, both throwing out smears and totally unable to back them up, both referencing a Sartre quote they clearly don't understand while doing the very thing it criticises. What are the odds!?

We're being nice. As I said to the other user who tried to pull that, Sartre would have had you in tears:

Sartre was a lifelong Marxist. A man who opposed the Nazi occupation of France, was happy to support revolutionary communist resistance groups, and was a prisoner of war taken by the Nazis. He wrote about the fact that the Soviet Union was a true revelutionary project working for the betterment of all mankind. He had his criticisms like we all do when it didn't live up to it's ideals, but unlike other nations he considered to be mostly disgusting bourgeois colonial powers, he didn't ascribe it to an innate problem with the USSR. He called the US of the time "dangerously pre fascist". He strongly condemned the US and South Korea in the Korean War. He was disgusted by the US involvement in Vietnam. Loathed the later French state for their oppression of Algeria. And on and on and on.

You'd have called him a brainwashed, tankie, genocide denying, authoritarian, equivalent to the Nazis too. And he'd have fucking hated you and everything you apparently stand for in return.

[–] AreaSIX@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Reactionaries quoting Sartre is just chef's kiss. They just want to silence any opposition to Nato raping every nation deemed to be non western. It's always the same shit. You were against the invasion of Iraq? SADDAM SUPPORTER! Opposed the Afghanistan invasion? PRACTICALLY A MEMBER OF TALIBAN!

"Either you're with us or you're with the enemy" has always been their mode of operation, and whaddya know, the whole world turns out to be the enemy, because no one outside of Europe wants to be with them.

[–] flan@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

AH KNOWS IT WHEN AH SEES IT

[–] somename@hexbear.net 21 points 1 year ago

Are you just calling things you don't want to answer weasel words? It was a pretty straightforward question. Just share what it means.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago

"Disinformation" seems like the weasel word, since this is your reaction to defining it

[–] ProxyTheAwesome@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You are the weasel here natoid, using modern McCarthyism as a bludgeon for your pointless posting diatribes

[–] alcoholicorn@hexbear.net -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

-oid on its own isn't great due to the way reactionaries use it if you're not referencing their use of it or something, maybe use 'nato-simp', 'natsec ghoul' or 'little piggie baying for the blood of foreigners'.

[–] ProxyTheAwesome@hexbear.net -5 points 1 year ago

Nah. Reactionaries don't own language and I won't retreat from every suffix they've ever uttered. Tired of these language policing games.

[–] Flaps@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

'Hexbear spreads kremlin propaganda!'

'where' s the propaganda? Can you define it? '

' Nu uh tankie'

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

Things such as "Maidan was a Nazi coup" which I've seen plastered all over the place by hexbear users as soon as Ukraine came up. Hand-in hand with that goes the usual denial of agency to the Ukrainian people which though doesn't always follow Russian agitprop lines (according to which Ukrainians aren't a people and the Ukrainian state doesn't really exist) but often also American exceptionalism ("The only reason Ukrainians could want anything is because the CIA implanted it in their heads), geopolitical Realism, etc. In any case it's still vile.