Fair critique.

And, can I not create a separate account on them?

Ergo, just because you unfederated something, doesn’t mean it dies.

The only issue here is whether I should be able to login to an unmoderated server with a moderated server’s account, I believe I should. Since the only content a moderator truly controls is what comes across their own server either way.

Both, my idea, and Lemmy, allow for unmoderated servers.

By that logic, so does Lemmy.

That’s not how it’s supposed to go, mate.

Please show me where I said I wanted it unmoderated. I want moderators to choose what they host on their own servers, but for users to be able to use multiple servers. Said that multiple times.

Optimized translates to, for a single use case.

The more form you give something, the narrower its uses become. Which is why innovative sites must spend years hatching schemes to work within “optimized” wheels. It’s why Google and Amazon have both created their own databases and left SQL behind. Because SQL is optimized for a very specific use case.

Then you get into other problems, like http(s). It was optimized for one-time connections, because you connect to something, send a request, get it, then the connection closes. Which lead to the need for WebRTC – which is an entire mess of its own, trying to get around that restriction.

Optimized means a use-case became narrower and narrower over time. One of the most reinvented things in history, other than the mousetrap, is the wheel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UfoM4UbLak

No, but this sub is pretty much filled with questions just like it. And you haven’t said a thing to any of them. Which makes me think this particular post has hit a nerve?

The lowest trust was politicians and news media. The highest in that survey was small business and military (what a marriage). Small businesses charge the military $35 for a screw.

Trust and asking questions are separate things. Trust is a feeling. Asking questions is a lifestyle change.

Then you’re getting work done under the terms of what you’re told, which again, puts you under the control of those who tell you what to do. Why can’t you question what you’re doing, while you’re doing it? Are there really people who can’t think while they’re working?

You should be trying to break everything you’re told, as soon as you’re told it. That’s called thinking. You don’t have to voice it, but you should be trying to find exceptions to the rules as soon as a rule is presented to you.

You should have an internal feeling of the subject matter that you compare to your life experiences, and then wonder if there are exceptions to what’s being presented.

People are self-serving. And if you’re not constantly questioning what you’re told, you’re going to be under their control. Pursuing their interests.

I mean, every student in class had questions and thoughts about how the math could be manipulated when he was teaching us.

Nah, I was talking about making an alternative to Lemmy, where forums were local to each server, but your home server allowed you to login to third-party servers. That way, a balance would be created between mods being able to moderate the servers they owned and users being able to choose the servers they interacted with.

I was quickly called a Nazi, because I valued free speech (what they actually said), and would inevitably want to join Nazi groups – even though I’m Ashkenazi.

Every report like this uses a small sample size to represent the entire population. Do you think they’re surveying 400 million people?

The question is, how did they get these 1500 people, and can it be repeated? If so, then the data is valid.

But basically, a lot hangs on how random their sample size was. Did they stick to one area? Did they stick to one age group, sex, etc. All in all, if the sample group is random, 1500 people is a valid measure for this data.

After this, there needs to be peer review. Other institutions need to be able to repeat the results with their own random groups.

But, 1500 is a great sample size. Just need to make sure it’s random and repeatable.

Because of the social expectation that Lemmy sets. The social expectation is that moderators have the option of defederating anyone on their users’ behalves. They shouldn’t have that right.

I understand that moderators exist across multiple jurisdictions, and their servers fall under multiple laws. So, while a moderator would be able to control his own server’s content under my system, his users would be able to login to other servers which he lacked control of. Granting mods control over local content, but not user interaction with the network.

Balancing expectation between user freedom and server ownership – the mod also being able to whitelist servers he’ll accept other users from.

Lemmy works by your posts propagating to other servers.

If you’re on server A, and I’m on server B, server B’s moderator can block all of server A. They can make it where I never see your content.

My grandmother was Ashkenazi. Bark up someone else’s tree.

Also, who moderates the moderators?

And, if a moderator of another instance defederates me?

Every single time people want to have an unmoderated, unchecked space, it’s because they — you — want to be able to air your most unsavoury opinions with impunity.

Exactly!

Then come the Nazis, then come the CSAM, the decapitation videos, the harassment and doxxing, and so on until some part of it passes your personal line in the sand for what’s acceptable.

That would be up to the server owner (Moderation). There’s nothing wrong with decapitation videos.

Then all of a sudden it’s “Wah wah, mommy give me moderation”. It’s the same for all this freeze peach crap.

There’s already moderation built into this.

The server moderator creates the community, or gives users permission to create communities on their server. I have no problem with that model.

Hosting servers basically have 4 functions:

• Registering users
• Authenticating users to other servers
• Hosting forums
• Pushing/Receiving notifications

Let’s say you’re running server at example.com, and I sign up. My username is bob. So, I’m bob@example.com.

Example.com has several local forums, but they lack a significant tech community. So, I go to example2.com, which has a large tech community. Using my login from example.com (and postMessages), I login to example2.com, as bob@example.com. Example2.com has example.com whitelisted as a valid authenticator. So, it will accept their users.

Let’s then say that Bob gets a reply at example2.com. Example2.com pushes a notification to example.com, where Bob can read it.

I think you should be able to decide which forums and cross-domains users you host and federate with on your own server, but not which cross-domains and forums your users interact with on other servers.

Because I shouldn’t have to be at the mercy of other moderators to communicate with people.

If I have an identity, I should be able to use it however I like.