Media reports in the West have sometimes exaggerated or inaccurately described this concept.

But the concept exists, nonetheless.

The idea that the tech and surveillance obsessed Chinese government isn’t keeping tags on its citizens, to at least the same degree western countries are keeping tags on theirs is patently absurd, and all you’re doing by pretending otherwise is licking the left boot instead of the right,.

The fucking side picking on this, and the principles so called progressives and even leftist (being openly welcomed to the tankie side, I guess) are willing to throw out the window just to defend an openly oppressive and abusive state simply because it is “anti-American”, as if both aren’t pulling the same shit in slightly different variations, is doing my fucking head in.

What will it take for people to realise all states exist to oppress and control the working class for the benefit of the ruling one, no matter who it theoretically opposes? (not a social media fad, that’s for fucking sure)

This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone, but sadly people wouldn’t listen, they were (rightfully!) so desperate to get the tories out, they didn’t want to hear that the establishment had arranged for them to be voting another one straight in.

And they also don’t want to hear that this was entirely intentional, that it is a well established way of getting the blue tories back in and worse than ever next election, and that continuing to play this silly game of “vote for one of the two people we’ve approved for you to vote for” is ever going to benefit us as a society, but only the ones manipulating us in to keeping them in power.

And so the exact same cyclical shit will keep happening.

(sarcasm. the CCP is hatefully repressive to queer identities.)

And yet, here you are, making this post.

Would you be making a post giving trump props if an occasion happened where he was the broken clock that happened to be right that one time? No? Then what are you doing here? (I don’t need you response, this is something you should be asking yourself)

Oh, they’re definitely people, just class betraying, oppressive, abusive people, who dedicate their lives to work exclusively in service of even more oppressive and abusive people, in exchange for some power to trip on.

I couldn’t give two fucks what a bastard would like ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I wasn’t going to engage, because lets be honest, there’s no point, but I happened to scroll past these the other day, and you’ve given me a good opportunity to use them, and others might enjoy, so:

a country that only cares about billionaires and companies

So… Both countries involved?

Homelessness doesn’t exist because of a lack of housing.

Social mobility just works in both directions, and about as often.

Yeah, no, that’s a massive streaming pile of self soothing bullshit that isn’t convincing anyone but you.

Let’s say that you have an opportunity to gain billions to fix the society from the top.

Society can not, and never will be, fixed from the top.

Nor is money the solution to our problems, if anything, they are a huge part of the cause (and why communism aspires to a moneyless society, among other things).

So even if I say I’d only accept the money if I could instantly redistribute it, as long as other billionaires, and the systems that create and uphold them, exist, my personal actions would probably make little difference in the long run, and any money I shared would end up right back in their pockets (by virtue of how capitalism works).

This right here.

And the point is that an average American barely knows how those work, or exactly what information the government and or private financial and other companies collect about them (it’s a lot), in the same way the average Chinese person barely knows just how much surveillance their government is doing on them (it’s a lot) or how much it impacts their daily lives (deeply).

This post is such tankie bullshit.

Pretending like only one government does (internal and external) propaganda, or only one government is oppressing and lying to its own people (not to mention people in other countries), or that the average person in any country know, or is willing to admit to themselves, never mind others, and especially never mind people from a country you’ve been propagandised against from birth, the flaws of their own government is not only laughable, and hypocritical, but also massively counterproductive.

Thanks for the heads up.

OP - my feedback is fix this.

Ok, fantastic! I definitely agree with trying it out more open at first and then adjusting as/if needed when issues come up. Which they’re bound to, because we’re a bunch of random people on the internet after all, but I think addressing them as they come would be easier both on you in terms of not having to plan ahead for every eventuality (easier said than done, I know), but also easier to resolve each individual issue, because it’ll be right in front of you/the community to assess and consider as is, rather than a hypothetical.

Thanks for taking the time to talk things through and clarify, it is very much appreciated, and is a great sign of things to come!

Maybe I’m misunderstanding? From what I gather from this post, while those who have been vouched for (and thrediverse enjoyers) can vote, but only those who donate can open threads up in the relevant comm, which to my understanding is the only way to bring issues up for a vote in the first place? That seems like more privilege.

Like I said, I hear you, and I understand that it is a complicated issue to resolve, and that this is only an initial solution, but that you are aware and taking it in to consideration, and I’m genuinely not trying to give you a hard time or be a pain, just wanting to keep my concern on the record.

Subscribed.

Now I know we’ve discussed this and that you’ve clearly explained why this is currently the case and heard and understood my concerns (as I have yours), and also clarified here that it is just an initial solution, so I’m not trying to rehash the discussion, but just want to stay on the record saying that I am uncomfortable with those who can donate money being given more privilege/power, however seemingly minor, than those who can’t, and I am really hoping a better solution can be worked out eventually.

Either way, thank you for all the time and resources you have and are investing in this instance, this development is genuinely exciting, and I can’t wait to see how it’ll work in practice!

Good on you!

Yeah, like I said, I understand that they are not the same and that online communities bring up challenges that irl ones don’t, but I think we should still try to apply as many of the same principals to online communities as we would to irl ones as possible.

That said, I absolutely recognise that not everyone has the funds or energy to be seen, which is why I want to provide other ways for recognition to happen.

Cool, that’s basically the point I was aiming at with far too many words lol and just to reiterate, none of it was criticism or doubt of your admining, just wanting to highlight potential pitfalls.

Re flairs and tags, thanks for clarifying! It’s completely understandable that it isn’t a top priority, it isn’t one for me as a user either, though I do like the idea of a personal strike system for milder offenders before resorting to blocking lol but also to highlight friendlies, since I’m terrible with names 😂I’ll have to keep an eye out for interesting extensions…

Well if someone cannot donate and cannot be seen contributing in any way, there’s very few ways to validate they’re a contributing member in the comm

Change online “comm” to real life “community” and that becomes pretty problematic (we should not be relating levels of contribution to levels of rights and power/say).

I’m genuinely not trying to give you a hard time, and I understand that the two are not the same, and that running an online community has its unique challenges (anonymity, trolls, sock accounts, vote manipulation, and on and on), but I also think it’s really important to keep the framing of things in mind because it can be so fucking easy to default, even without wanting or meaning to, to the hierarchal constructs we are familiar and surrounded with.

I’ve never run any community or organisation online or irl, not even modded a community (was only appointed as one on my previous shitjustworks account as a backup), so I don’t claim to fully understand the challenges you face in implementing this, or have a magic solution to offer, but I think these points are fundamental and worth highlighting, so I am.

As for the tagging, just to clarify, because I think I misunderstood what a tag or flair is, are they the same? I assumed a flair was the emoji looking things, and those it makes sense that only you can add, in my mind a tag would be like some of the apps have, where you can tag a user as say “troll” rather than blocking, but is that not a thing that is happening here? (sorry, I’m only just waking and baking lol)

Initial plan is that every subscriber should be allowed to vote, but only subscribers who fund a lot can open new votes for mandates.

I feel like this puts the poorest people in the community who may not be able to afford to donate as much or at all at a significant disadvantage and creates an unnecessary hierarchy (as well as, like you say, room for manipulation, someone who can afford to donate more having more power is icky), as do the different tiers for level of donation.

I can understand why you want to limit voting to people who are an active part of the community (though again, there becomes a hierarchy, like what about people who mostly lurk and only comment rarely? Do we start questioning why someone doesn’t participate as much as others? Neurodiversity and other health issues can play a huge part, as can poor education and access to information so someone might not feel confident enough to be very active, but are they then lesser members of the community? What about people who don’t have regular access to a device or reliable internet?), and I agree that there should be some way to tell who is a member in good faith and who isn’t, but I really don’t think that basing it on monetary value and stakeholders (which feels far too close in concept to shareholders), or ranking users in general is the way to go.

In any case, I think the fact that you want to make the instance’s running more communal is fantastic, and I think the idea itself is good, but parts of it might still need a little more cooking lol

As for the tags, can we as users tag other users? Will they see the tag, or that we tagged them? Will you, as a sysadmin?