this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
348 points (99.2% liked)

sh.itjust.works Main Community

8045 readers
18 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

Matrix

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
348
Beehaw* defederated us? (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by can@sh.itjust.works to c/main@sh.itjust.works
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tallwookie@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago (11 children)

eh I just read through the post over there, I suppose their concerns are somewhat valid, to a point, but there really isnt a "safe space" anywhere except between your ears.

really just reads like excuses to being lazy.

[–] DigiWolf@kbin.social 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

My problem with Beehaw in general is it reeks of overzealous and manipulative mods. The internet is full of awful people but to pretend you can make an island of purity where you get to decide what is pure is going to be a worse idea in the long run.

[–] Frz@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I find it ironic that they say fake niceness will only scare people off, but all the “ethos engineering” only promotes a culture of fake niceness. I don’t buy all this “walled utopia” idealism, especially since this place isn’t like Discord with private servers, but a public interconnected forum. Why choose to set up on the Fediverse if you’re not open to ”strangers” accessing your community? But oh well, I think they’ll probably defederate more and more over time (or switch to whitelist).

[–] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.one 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They want the benefits of federation with none of the negatives or obligations.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago

Reminds me a bit of parents who want the benefit of just putting their kid on the internet so they don't have to entertain the kid themselves but then try to censor everyone when the kid finds anything online they didn't want the kid to see.

load more comments (9 replies)