• poVoq
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Bluesky is explicitly promoting their system as “choose your own censorship” kind of deal, which in the way it is framed could look very attractive to right-wingers looking for an alternative platform. While this is technically also true for the Fediverse, it isn’t promoted as such, and rather has a reputation for the opposite, as most fedi server admins are center-left leaning.

    Bluesky might be also more left-leaning right now as obviously there is little reason for right-wingers elsewhere to switch away from Shitter to another (mostly) centralised platform, but given the overall low user numbers this could switch very quickly.

    I guess we will have to see how this develops over time and get some answers from Brazilians that have a deeper understanding of the current social dynamics there.

    Due to the language divide it might end up as two distinct social spheres, like Fedi’s Japanese bubble, but that’s a best case scenario for Bluesky I guess.

    • Ada
      link
      fedilink
      English
      64 months ago

      Bluesky is explicitly promoting their system as “choose your own censorship” kind of deal

      That’s why I don’t use it. I am not ok with bigots sharing my network. This is true whether I can see them or not. If they’re welcome, then I won’t be there.

      Let me know when I can disconnect from spaces that host bigots rather than just hiding them

      • @JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        04 months ago

        This reads like satire. These are people you’re talking about, probably your fellow citizens. Their wrong opinions are not going to pollute you from the other side of a wall. Seeing (apparently sincere) takes like this really makes me worried about the future of democracy.

        • Ada
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          Let me clarify so I understand your position

          1. I said why I don’t use Bluesky. I didn’t say it shouldn’t exist, or that other people shouldn’t use it. I didn’t pass judgement on people who do use it, or suggest that their having a different opinion on how to deal with bigotry is an issue. I simply said why I don’t use it

          2. You then insisted that I am the problem with democracy, despite you being the person insisting that everyone has to do things your preferred way?

          Do I understand your position correctly?

          • @JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            24 months ago

            Sort of. Essentially I am saying that in a democracy we need to talk to each other, and sticking one’s fingers in one’s ears and chanting “lalalala I can’t hear you” seems like a poor way to go about that. These people can vote too. Like it or not, you have an interest in understanding what makes them tick and what might help them to see the world in a way more conducive to you.

            • Ada
              link
              fedilink
              English
              24 months ago

              Essentially I am saying that in a democracy we need to talk to each other

              That doesn’t happen on bluesky either though. The moderation approach on bluesky means that people can control who they see, and who can interact with them. So people can still remove bigots from their timeline.

              I also take issue with your insistence that bigots have the right to be bigoted and spread hate, and that their targets are somehow in the wrong for not wanting to be exposed to that hate.

              • @JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                14 months ago

                Assuming that “bigots” is not a synonym for “anyone I disagree with”, then fair enough.

                My underlying point is that technology is making it very easy to wall ourselves off into comfortable echo chambers. Some are even calling that “safety”. From my understanding of history, this looks like an obviously slippery and dangerous slope to be on.

                But if are talking about what most of your fellow citizens would also identify as “bigots”, then fair enough.

                • Ada
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  14 months ago

                  Assuming that “bigots” is not a synonym for “anyone I disagree with”, then fair enough.

                  Why would it be?

                  My underlying point is that technology is making it very easy to wall ourselves off into comfortable echo chambers

                  Your experience is different to mine. I wish I could wall myself off from people who want to remove my rights and target me with hate, but I’ve yet to find a way of doing that.

                  • @JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    14 months ago

                    I wish I could wall myself off from

                    Well this is at least honest!

                    Perhaps it’s a personality thing. Perhaps generational. Technically I’m a member of a minority community but I’ve never defined myself by that, and “hate” in the contemporary sense (I think its meaning has drifted unhelpfully) is not something that especially bothers me. My experience is that most people are well-meaning, so I tend to be intrigued by the question of why they think the things they do.

                    Anyway, this is not a debate with a single correct answer. It is of course your right to shut out whoever you want, I won’t question that.