Cause no one is stopping you from going to said instance and just having the discussion there.
If there was this super important leak that needed to be out there, if it’s posted on a right wing instance that is a defederated ghost town, it’s still out there. People can link to it and leverage the instance to have the needed discussions.
Censorship means removing access, defederation does not wipe it off of the Internet.
“We are not banning books, we are just not allowing them in libraries and schools. You can always buy them if you feel the need to expose your child to them.”
So, following your logic, the right isn’t suppressing information about LGBtQI+ people.
Dont get me wrong please, I don’t think right wing content should stand unchallenged. I am just not a big fan of only allowing the “correct” information. Because, that is what the right is doing already (while screaming about free speach, mind you). I think it’s better to engage with right content and destroy it with arguments, rather then just banning it. I know I’m a minority with that opinion on Lemmy. I’m fine with that.
The issue with this is signal-to-noise ratio. If everything is equally valuable speech, then it becomes a bad platform for discussion.
The solution is for the individuals that want to share their right wing views to do so from an instance that are not consided problematic. I live in Norway, we are considered one of the most democratic countries in the world, and we do not allow hate speech.
A lot of the speech from right wing Americans would easily be considered unlawful here. With good reason.
There is nothing stopping someone with right wing views from registering and sharing their opinions on most Lemmy instances. Except if they want to act as bigots. They are free to talk about pretty much any traditional right wing topic. They can talk about immigration, how the money will trickle down anytime now, and most topics.
Right wing people are welcome at Lemmy. They are just not allowed to spread hate and be explicit bigots. The ones who leave or don’t join are not censored, they are just whiny and complain when people are sick of their shit.
It’s more like building a second library for those books and putting it in an undesirable part of town. Still findable, just a bit harder and made less.likely for your average person to find
I think it’s fair to tweak it and leave that second library with full accountability for the lack of desirability.
Domain names don’t start out undesirable, they build their reputation from the content and users.
So it’s like building a second library in a perfectly nice spot, and having that library attract people who dump pollution into the surrounding area, making it undesirable.
Damn, I actually didn’t see that coming, I guess they will move the goal post from any starting point.
I’m going to play devil’s advocate and ask: How is it not censorship?
Cause no one is stopping you from going to said instance and just having the discussion there.
If there was this super important leak that needed to be out there, if it’s posted on a right wing instance that is a defederated ghost town, it’s still out there. People can link to it and leverage the instance to have the needed discussions.
Censorship means removing access, defederation does not wipe it off of the Internet.
I would argue that censorship includes the suppression of information in its definition, not only it’s removal.
The information isn’t being suppressed, just not allowed to seep our of the trash bin it’s currently in
If you want the garbage it’s easy to find. Most normal people don’t, so it gets kept where it won’t taint everything
Same logic applied to something the right does:
“We are not banning books, we are just not allowing them in libraries and schools. You can always buy them if you feel the need to expose your child to them.”
So, following your logic, the right isn’t suppressing information about LGBtQI+ people.
Dont get me wrong please, I don’t think right wing content should stand unchallenged. I am just not a big fan of only allowing the “correct” information. Because, that is what the right is doing already (while screaming about free speach, mind you). I think it’s better to engage with right content and destroy it with arguments, rather then just banning it. I know I’m a minority with that opinion on Lemmy. I’m fine with that.
The issue with this is signal-to-noise ratio. If everything is equally valuable speech, then it becomes a bad platform for discussion.
The solution is for the individuals that want to share their right wing views to do so from an instance that are not consided problematic. I live in Norway, we are considered one of the most democratic countries in the world, and we do not allow hate speech.
A lot of the speech from right wing Americans would easily be considered unlawful here. With good reason.
There is nothing stopping someone with right wing views from registering and sharing their opinions on most Lemmy instances. Except if they want to act as bigots. They are free to talk about pretty much any traditional right wing topic. They can talk about immigration, how the money will trickle down anytime now, and most topics.
Right wing people are welcome at Lemmy. They are just not allowed to spread hate and be explicit bigots. The ones who leave or don’t join are not censored, they are just whiny and complain when people are sick of their shit.
No, it’s not at all the same situation or logic
It’s more like building a second library for those books and putting it in an undesirable part of town. Still findable, just a bit harder and made less.likely for your average person to find
Great analogy.
I think it’s fair to tweak it and leave that second library with full accountability for the lack of desirability.
Domain names don’t start out undesirable, they build their reputation from the content and users.
So it’s like building a second library in a perfectly nice spot, and having that library attract people who dump pollution into the surrounding area, making it undesirable.