I thought linking to tweets was pretty much banned in the fediverse. Apparently not?
Edit: sorry for the thought crime of thinking I saw some general agreement in several posts a couple weeks ago where it seemed wildly popular to ban links to a platform that funds Nazis. I’ll try not to commit that heinous act again.
It depends on the instance, because there are no universal rules across the fediverse, that’s the point of the fediverse, and I don’t believe this instance voted to do the pointless act of banning Twitter.
I fully realize this. I’m referring to a larger discussion which was an idea being thrown out which a lot of communities and instances seemed on board with.
That’s fine but your comment was basically “oh not everyone is doing the same thing on the fediverse?” Which you just acknowledged is the point of the fediverse. So you should criticize specific instances rather than just making a blanket statement
In order to block that, every single admin on every single instance would have to set up blocking tools. From there, anyone that decides to start their own instance would have to decide to also set up those tools. Thats the main draw of the fediverse, you cant block anything because someone can always federate with an instance that doesnt have that thing blocked.
Just empathize for a moment, imagine - you’re scrolling on your feed which encompasses the world’s daily news. You see a picture of a modern day concentration camp’s aftermath. You see the gruesome effect it has on people or you say the mass grave. You open it up and you decide to write a comment. What do you comment on?
I just think if it’s anything other than empathizing with the subject matter and engaging with it your comment is going to come across as robotic, as inhuman, because if something like this doesn’t move you then there’s something wrong. I don’t think a meta comment pinned to an empathic and engaging topic would be down voted so horribly. For instance, if someone said “I can’t believe this level of cruelty is still going on in places with abundant resources historically. Side note: when the source material moves off Twitter we should reshare that as Twitter is owned by a Nazi.” I would think people wouldn’t stop to down vote.
It’s not about getting in line with the prevailing narrative in this instance, it’s just the nature of Internet discussion in an aggregate platform on a serious topic that’s got a long time scale. You’re talking to strangers about people being tortured or dying and we live in a world where some non-marginal amount of people don’t care or applaud it so the first thing a frequent reader wants to do when reading a comment is vet that you’re not one of the applauders.
I thought linking to tweets was pretty much banned in the fediverse. Apparently not?
Edit: sorry for the thought crime of thinking I saw some general agreement in several posts a couple weeks ago where it seemed wildly popular to ban links to a platform that funds Nazis. I’ll try not to commit that heinous act again.
Maybe stay on topic to the thread next time.
Sees post of horrifying condition of Palestinian man
“Why is there a Twitter link I thought Twitter was evil?”
There’s a time and a place.
It depends on the instance, because there are no universal rules across the fediverse, that’s the point of the fediverse, and I don’t believe this instance voted to do the pointless act of banning Twitter.
I fully realize this. I’m referring to a larger discussion which was an idea being thrown out which a lot of communities and instances seemed on board with.
That’s fine but your comment was basically “oh not everyone is doing the same thing on the fediverse?” Which you just acknowledged is the point of the fediverse. So you should criticize specific instances rather than just making a blanket statement
You misunderstood me. It wasn’t a criticism, it was a confirmation of misunderstanding
I didnt know that. Where can I find these claims ?
I didn’t say it was a hard and fast rule. I had just seen a lot of discussion about it and some communities and instances I know seemed on board. The lemmy search feature kinda sucks as usual but this shows a few examples of the types of posts I’d seen: https://lemmy.world/search?q=links+to+twitter&type=All&listingType=All&page=1&sort=TopAll
Dbzer0 has banned them. world has not I don’t believe
How would that possibly be enforced
Moderation and/or bots? That wouldn’t be hard at all.
In order to block that, every single admin on every single instance would have to set up blocking tools. From there, anyone that decides to start their own instance would have to decide to also set up those tools. Thats the main draw of the fediverse, you cant block anything because someone can always federate with an instance that doesnt have that thing blocked.
It’s not my fault that you can’t understand the idea of general agreement vs strict requirement enforced with an iron fist.
Twitter is still one of the primary content discovery platforms. Reddit is a distilled Twitter feed.
I feel like these threads about palestine / gaza are very emotionally charged.
Anything other than abject support for this thread and the prevailing narrative will be unwelcome.
Just empathize for a moment, imagine - you’re scrolling on your feed which encompasses the world’s daily news. You see a picture of a modern day concentration camp’s aftermath. You see the gruesome effect it has on people or you say the mass grave. You open it up and you decide to write a comment. What do you comment on?
I just think if it’s anything other than empathizing with the subject matter and engaging with it your comment is going to come across as robotic, as inhuman, because if something like this doesn’t move you then there’s something wrong. I don’t think a meta comment pinned to an empathic and engaging topic would be down voted so horribly. For instance, if someone said “I can’t believe this level of cruelty is still going on in places with abundant resources historically. Side note: when the source material moves off Twitter we should reshare that as Twitter is owned by a Nazi.” I would think people wouldn’t stop to down vote.
It’s not about getting in line with the prevailing narrative in this instance, it’s just the nature of Internet discussion in an aggregate platform on a serious topic that’s got a long time scale. You’re talking to strangers about people being tortured or dying and we live in a world where some non-marginal amount of people don’t care or applaud it so the first thing a frequent reader wants to do when reading a comment is vet that you’re not one of the applauders.
I don’t think that really adequately describes what’s happening in this thread.
Yes the subject is distressing, but plenty of distressing topics are discussed on lemmy all the time without this level of animosity.
I feel like every “distressing” thread has comments like that one that are innocent but obtuse and suffer the same vote ratio.
But perception is manipulative, without data I can’t back my position. Maybe we’re both wrong and the reality is somewhere in the middle.