this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
515 points (98.9% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54772 readers
400 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This is another post that alerted me of this.

https://lemmy.world/post/13287681

And here is the modlog:

https://lemmy.world/modlog?page=1&actionType=ModRemoveCommunity

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 8 months ago (3 children)

If we're to have any chance at convincing more Reddit users to join the Fediverse, the main Lemmy and Kbin instances need to stick together. While the piracy community being among the biggest arguably doesn't make for great optics (having a greater variety of communities above the 50k user mark would help bring more users to Lemmy), a fragmented federation only helps Reddit. Beyond that, this community has rules in place to ensure that posts stick to the discussion of piracy, and not piracy itself.

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Nah I wouldn't want Lemmy to attract anti-piracy bootlickers (specially considering why we left Reddit for Lemmy in the first place). This being the largest community is a good filter imo.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 17 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But a federation is fragmentation. If the only thing that doesn't help reddit is another centralized system, then that's really just a claim that private ownership of the internet is good, actually, so long as we like the owners.

[–] ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

I assume they mean more like what's happening on Mastodon, where instances mass defederate other instances for not having the same instances defederated

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Defederation really should be last resort, a lot of admin use it as a first one. (Even dbzer0 censors 187 instances)

[–] kbal@fedia.io 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The vast majority of those (on the dbzer0 list) are obviously just copied from someone's medium-sized mastodon blocklist, which in this case mostly includes instances that definitely deserve it. I recognize only a few dubious choices in there, and none that are completely indefensible.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The instances in our blocklist are based on the fediseer. It's mostly CSAM, Bigoted and potentiall spam instances.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The current fediseer censured list seems much larger and correspondingly more problematic in places. You've started out with a good list, hope you exercise due caution in adding to it.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The fediseer censure list is relative to which instances you're referencing. There's no absolute "fediseer censure list"

[–] kbal@fedia.io 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, sorry, I've never really looked at it before. But its web UI just shows them all as one big list. I wouldn't mind seeing a list of those censured by more than 10 instances, or all of a selected group of instances... is that in the API?

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yes you can do that in the API, as well as filter by tags. You can also select your instance references on the UI