@aral From that instance I can't really say that I'm that surprised to be honest.


@sotolf Yeah, had a quick look then blocked it :)

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 2
@aral @sotolf

"censorship hurts everyone, even if it gives you warm fuzzies that your enemies are being censored. it also keeps you in the dark about how wide their reach is, what they're saying, or what they're planning."

How would one person ignoring someone equate to censoring them? If I ignore something you say I'm not censoring you, I'm just ignoring what you say.

aral has a personal instance from what I can remember.


@sotolf @aral
aral of course manages his instance to his liking . I keep my federated timeline maximally open. It gets crappy at times, but by keeping it open I get info I wouldn't get from any other place.
@aral @otso @sotolf Some folk are really burnt out about major instances doing megalomaniac blocking (like blocking you for not blocking someone else sike)
@aral @otso @sotolf but yeah, even most anti-block folk agree that single users instances or normal users could and should block people who annoy them

@meeper @aral @otso

How is blocking someone censoring? and also aral is on a single user instance.

@sotolf @aral @otso Exactly lol, I don't think blocking is censoring at all in most cases, I just mean major instances do instance blocks for very dumb reasons,

and that's why people are so sensitive around blocking here
(at least a few people have left fedi because they couldn't interact with someone who wanted to interact with them because of blocking based on stupid reasons)


Well yeah, of course one has to join an instance that doesn't block people one is interested in, but that is probably one of the reasons people like aral has a personal instance to be able to control stuff like that for themselves :)

@aral @otso


Not everyone has the time and money to invest in that.

@meeper @aral

@sotolf @aral @otso yeah, that should be the ideal, I was just giving an explanation over why you would find some folk to be so sensitive over blocking.

It still doesn't answer how blocking "is censoring" though, that's a concept I find really hard to grasp. they can like it as little as they won't but me not spreading your stuff doesn't mean I'm censoring you, I'm just not spreading your stuff.
@aral @otso

@meeper @sotolf @aral
the banning game is very stupid, it takes down the whole network

a single user instance banning an instance takes down the whole network? seriously, that's really a strange way to look at things.
@meeper @aral

@sotolf @otso @aral Nah, I don't think they mean single user instances like I said it's when relatively large instances do that it *can* be problematic ( i mean in some cases yeah go for it, like some instances are obviously just to avoid but as I said blacks have happened for ridiculous reasons)

They are commenting on a post from @aral which is on a single user instance is blocking another instance, so I kind of wonder how you can see it any other way.


@sotolf @meeper @aral
he is free to have his instance the way he likes, what is the problem?


Ah so you're just a troll then and use words such as censorship without knowing what it means, good to get that confirmed ;)

Jeg hadde håpet på mer fra söta bror men se'kke bra ut gitt :p

@aral @meeper

@sotolf @otso @aral

I think they made that post thinking that it was something and then realizing something else..

well nvm

Poor aral though, wish mastodon had pleroma-style mute threads
@sotolf @aral @otso yeah, I think it was consensus already that they didn't have any problem with it after learning that :/


the username (at)aral(at)mastadon.ar.al kind of should have been a pointer in that direction ;)

They still have failed to explain how it is censoring to not spread something one person has posted though, and I don't understand that at all.

@aral @otso

@sotolf @meeper @aral
censoring is too heavy subject, use the mute option and you are fine.


So you don't understand censorship ;) good to know ;)

@aral @meeper

@otso @aral Which you are free to do, but please explain how it is censoring to ignore someone.

@otso @aral

That is not an explanation for how ignoring someone equals censorship.

@otso @sotolf I don’t think you understand what censorship is. Censorship is me preventing you from speaking. It’s not me not listening to you. Just as I should not be able to stop you from speaking, you don’t have the right to compel me to listen to your bullshit. Fart all you want. But not in my house.

@aral @aral @sotolf @otso Aral is spot-on, assuming Aral just blocked it for his acct, or Aral is the only user on the instance that blocked whatever source (if instance-wide block).

@otso @sotolf @aral (pet peeve sidebar) One partitularly nasty characteristic of #Mastodon is that when a node like mastodon.social censors an account like @altlink, all mastodon.social users who visit the altlink profile see “account has been blocked/suspended”, as if to imply that mamot.fr took an action against the acct when in fact it was mastodon.social.

@aral @otso @sotolf

Freedom of speech means freedom from interference, suppression or punitive action by the government — and nothing else. It does not mean the right to demand the financial support or the material means to express your views at the expense of other men who may not wish to support you. Freedom of speech includes the freedom not to agree, not to listen and not to support one’s own antagonists. A “right” does not include the material implementation of that right by other men; it includes only the freedom to earn that implementation by one’s own effort. Private citizens cannot use physical force or coercion; they cannot censor or suppress anyone’s views or publications. Only the government can do so. And censorship is a concept that pertains only to governmental action.

The Ayn Rand Column, 106

This is especially ironic when it’s alt-right whining about “not being heard” 😂

@otso @sotolf @aral

Fundamental issue with this argument is:

Aral (or any other fediverse member) != Big Tech

About Big Tech - agreed. Because they are effectively taking over the role of the government here, and in much more invasive way - while government is driven by laws, Big Tech is not driven by anything else than profit.

Which ultimately leads to a situation where Facebook will be maximizing divisive content because it drives engagement, and they will also engage in censorship to satisfy legal and political requirements, and they will do so in the way most cost effective for them, so sloppy and non-transparent.

@otso @sotolf @aral

So a decision to block someone taken by an _invididual_ isn't censorship - it's an individual decision to execute one's right not to listen to another individual you don't like engaging with.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Aral’s Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!