CEO and Marketing

Anyways, better reading that statement, it seens kinda fair.

Copypaste from another comment:

Yes, I only called them that way as a saying, and because in practice they operate as a de facto one, similar to how mastodon.social holds the title in Mastodon.

I have read the comic, and I disagreed, I'm on my right of doing so. And again, I have found instances that draw the line where I do: real damage. But again, the problem that I'm pointing is that it is worrying that people so unjustifiably and illogically expand the line of what constitutes hate speech in their spaces (and I speak for both extremes, not just those on the left, as incels are also unbearable), because in part thanks to that is where all the current polarization arises (and pay attention, in part, it is multifactorial of course). At least we agree that others have the right to block others if they don't want to read them, but I think banning is much trickier territory. Exactly in part the DECLARED purpose of these networks―that is, the Fediverse― is that there is more freedom of expression and thought than in, say, Blueshit, Shitter or Reshit, where moderators can ban you for absurd things. Do you think that only state censorship represents a problem? No. Any type of censorship, even personal, is a serious problem. Think about it, it is a problem that LGBTQ or racialized people cannot express themselves freely on traditional networks because that affects their scope of action and perpetuates their marginalization. The same thing happens with those of us who criticize totalitarian regimes.

Just gonna say, if you really hate or you really feel hurt by whatever someone says on the internet, just block them and/or use a blacklist of words.

You may also notice it's preceded by the word "solutions", plural, because I provided more than one solution.

Yeah, and I can't do neither of the two, it's that so hard to understand? I don't have good hardware, I don't have a good socioeconomic situation, I don't have good internet and it's hard to find these, miraculously I found those three.

They do exist, they turn in to Nazi bars fairly fast because that's what happens to freezepeach places, no-one else is willing to host them. Then they're defederated: because who the fuck wants to hang around a nazi bar. Then they disband: because freezepeach people always wanna yap, and refuse to listen, it's no fun yapping if no-one is listening. It's not called "free-listen" is it?

That's a slippery slope fallacy. The problem is that you are again confusing freedom of speech with freedom to say or do harmful things. They are not the same. An environment that respects freedom of expression (which is not a fundamental right for nothing, without it you, or I, or both, would probably be going to jail for saying things that someone doesn't like) does not imply an environment free of rules and moderation. Of course I'm not going to make it so easy for literally Nazis, or literally Zionists, or literally Jihadists, or literally authoritarian communists, or anything like that, but that doesn't mean that if I criticize a government with good arguments then I should be banned just because some moderator thinks differently. People also leave those places and in fact those are better known for becoming radicalized and becoming worse echo chambers.