A lot of subreddits are banning/proposing to ban X links in response to Führer Elon’s wonderful gesture of love and tolerance. Should this instance follow suit?
Also, Instagram/Threads/Meta links. Same question.
You must log in or register to comment.
Yes please! I’d rather that platform be banned widely
Difficult question to answer.
- things happen on Twitter / Threads / Gab/ etc that are important/worth hearing about , or at least interesting, but
- I do not wish to send any traffic to these sites
- and definitely do not wish them making any money from my traffic
In the end I think we should not forbid or block, but be much more careful what we share from those sites. I also think it’s important - very important - to make any competing social media much more interesting to people wanting to be involved and kept up to date. How, I don’t know either but we shouldn’t be too strict on eg Bluesky, rather cooperate or something.
There’s always xcancel. Does that not solve most people’s concern?
It’s compatible with banning original links, and can break later
Block them. If they have something interesting or important to say, just quote it. Don’t send them even more traffic and attention.
Agreed. At least send the link shared to Twitter then, if there’s any. A screenshot is better than nothing.
A quote is not a source. The news often misquotes people or takes words out of context.
A tweet should be screenshotted with the original link along with an alternate to xcancel.com.
If the tweet itself has a link or mentions something elsewhere, a link to that source should also be provided.
Sounds like a lot but anything less is misinformation, as far as I’m concerned. So much news and memes have been spread where the subject is taken out of context. Hours or days or years will go by before people come to discover the true meaning of something and by then the impression has already been made.
Nuke it from orbit.
and the only regret, there isn’t a gravestone to visit to piss on.
huuuu yeah
bring on the fireworks and lets get the show on
Yes.
Yes
does not make any sense to ban if you dont want x link just dont open it but letting data to not flow on instance and instead using screenshot will just decrease the storage
Wasn’t Lemmy supposed to be for free speech/anti-censorship and shit? Or maybe I got it wrong? Yall do realize there are many reasonable things on X and not just the right-wing/Elon stuff. Right?
Lemmy is software that can be used however the instance admin that hosts the community that you are using want it to be used. It is censorship proof which means that you are free to launch your own instance and publish your own content which will be sent to and be accessible from other Lemmy software instances that federate with you and allow the content or people can sign in themselves to your local instance if you allow them to make accounts and access your software and hosting.
That makes sense. I guess the instances I’m using are pro-censorship and not Lemmy itself.
You have to be willing to walk away from and ignore corporate media platforms, or else they’ll never be defeated. And content creators need to also learn to not post their stuff to these platforms.
Some people take umbrage in supporting a publication owned by a nazi.
Soyflakes.
Haha nice one that’s so based and kekpilled my duderino
IKR.
Yes, we do realize that. But we can no longer fight them on a platform literally controlled algorithmically from the top-down by the worlds richest man who is backed by the commander-in-chief of the world’s best-funded military. Maybe deleting our accounts is a better strategy then ratioing losers on a platform subject to increasingly open and brazen manipulation.
Yes
Would it be possible to automatically change Twitter links posted and substitute them with a mirror site?
yes
Slippery slope of censorship. Where would it stop?
with a federated linked network of social media sites run by it’s users
what if there became a Nazi ran Mastodon or pixelfed or Lemmy instance?
Was presented with this question. Lets simplify it and remove the spin.
Are you ok with your enemy using the software you've published?I quickly answered,
yes! It's open source. This must include enemiesSimilar to free speech, censorship aside, if not willing to defend essholes being essholes then don’t really have free speech
Linus Torvalds slipped, tossing Russian maintainers. Politicizing open source makes it open for some, but not for others.
Which is a real dilemma cuz i hate everyone equally
To answer your question, the fediverse welcomes Nazi fascists commis gays whatever running instances. If don’t like the instance moderators can always jump on another instance. And instances owners do not federate with instances they don’t like.
… and the world goes on just fine
Things that aren’t Nazis might be a good stopping point
The way I see it, the slippery slope that we’re currently on is tolerating nazis and bigots.
… does ML still block curse words?
Do you think Lemmy should act like Meta, which banned Pixelfed links and Mastodon instances?
Logic like this is like refusing to use violence against colonizers because your colonizer uses violence.
Tactics cannot be evaluated solely on the basis of whether your opponent uses them. Banning certain sources robs them of a little bit more reach and that’s a good thing if you’re talking about an explicitly fascist platform. I think either screenshots or archive links should be the only time x posts are allowed.
Yes.
Evidence suggests that X is a hate site run by a fascist.
Meta isn’t quite there yet, but heading in the same direction.
Regardless if he is a saint or not, it’s super centralized social media and we shouldn’t support it
Centralisation isn’t inherently bad. It has many benefits from a technical perspective. Remember that none of these social networks got popular through not offering people what they wanted, and the vast majority of people do not want biased or hate filled sites.
But centralisation does give a lot of power and influence to the few, and so far, they have all been found wanting when it comes to not being evil.
recognizing the pattern of owners/mods abusing power and no one really agreeing what exactly that entails, will always find that decentralization is the way that it has to be.
We tried centralization and doesn’t go well. The answer is not to keep trying the same thing.
We tried centralization and doesn’t go well.
Well, no. Centralised social media did, and is, doing extremely well by most metrics.
We can build our ivory towers and feel happy and safe within them, but it doesn’t change the fact that we’re not missed and the above probably like that we’re not there pointing out its flaws.
Centralised social media did, and is, doing extremely well by most metrics.
Such as censorship (everywhere). shadowbanning (X), ownership by an egomaniac slyster (X), blue badges (X), and being ganged up on (reddit). i’m ignoring platforms for addicts such as tiktok, youtube, and instagram.
Which matrix are we ignoring in order come to the conclusion legacy social media is doing well? Be specific.
we’re not missed
You are right.
At the same time, those platforms are not providing enough value for users to stick around.
Centralised social media did, and is, doing extremely well by most metrics.Such as censorship (everywhere). shadowbanning (X), ownership by an egomaniac slyster (X), blue badges (X), and being ganged up on (reddit). i’m ignoring platforms for addicts such as tiktok, youtube, and instagram.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that these large social media companies are operating for your benefit.
A strange notion to hold.
