this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
142 points (84.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43940 readers
794 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To their credit, I think the Principles of Communism thing is partially meant as a floodgate, since the devs really do believe in their project and want to avoid over-centralization from everyone defaulting to one instance. They know many people will go "What the hell? No!" and go somewhere else and that's exactly the point. I'd be surprised if they really thought it would get almost anyone to engage with Marxism with the prompt, especially since you can copy the first sentence of the text and not read anything else (and even just reading it is not engaging with it). I think it's more like a little joke.
Also, copying a sentence of your choice to a pamphlet is not a pledge and I think it's silly to view it that way. If it helps, iirc, one of the sentences that appears is "No." and they will accept that as an answer.
But assuming this was "promoting an ideology directly," would you find it less sketchy for an instance to promote ideology indirectly? Because if you aren't directly doing ideology, that just means you are indirectly doing it (sometimes very deliberately). Personally, I appreciate transparency.
I think it's very funny that a lot of people will post "omg communism boogeyman? is this legal????", but they won't do a very basic introspection of ideology and online community moderation which is at the core the entire intent here.
Almost every lemmy instance has the same rule 1, those rules textually are often the same, those rules are often have the same meanings, but those rules are unevenly enforced between instances based on the ideology of that instance. That's why you can be a transphobe on .world without actually getting the same amount of mod action going your way as if you were a transphobe on hexbear/lemmy.ml/lemmygrad/blahaj.
Furthermore there's sociopolitical drama between the instances like between blahaj and hexbear on what transphobia actually is and what level of irony is allowed.
A lot of people interpret rule 1 as "don't be mean" rather than "be mean in ways that aren't racist/bigoted/sexist/transphobic/etc". Which is why they often complain that certain communities they can't post certain words, but user can dog pile them with community approved shitposting.
And then there's the lib instances who think that being mean to the Ukrainian war effort online is rule 1 and if not it's rule no disinformatsiya.
It's like when Twitter had to clarify, you cannot call for violence unless it's a call for violence that is part of the United States of America's foreign policy, because Trump as POTUS called for violence over Twitter as part of US FP. But we gotta always put the the damn commies under the microscope for making us copypasta Marxist thought.