I’ve been trying Lemmy for a little while and wasn’t sure how to feel about it.
Today, I wanted to start blocking the most high-censorship instances until I could find a fully zero-censorship instance and simply block all the ones with censorship. Filter bots, not people.
When I looked into it further, I found out there are no zero-censorship instances, because Lemmy relies on a broken “federation” system where each instance is supposed to be able to fetch posts from other instances, but it’s never been finished to reach a fully working state. Lemmy’s official docs say you can’t even do federation over Tor at all. This means it uses DNS, so it won’t actually allow Lemmy instances to fetch posts from each other freely, it just gets blocked instantly and easily, every time the authorities feel like blocking anything.
So you can only ever have the “average joe lemmy” and “average joe reddit” with everything approved by the authorities, and then “tor copies of lemmy” and “tor copies of reddit” where you have free speech but you can only reach other nerds.
People seem to think Lemmy is different because this weird censorship fetish is extremely popular and most of you are happy to see bans happen to certain people, not just bots, so a small Lemmy that censors certain people feels fundamentally different from a big reddit that censors more people. But it’s the exact same thing, it’s reddit.
When reddit was smaller, you could say basically anything you wanted there, they just wouldn’t let it reach the main audience. Then it got too big, and any tiny part of the audience you could reach would be too big, so they won’t let you talk at all.
Lemmy is now the small part of reddit where you can say whatever you want, separated from the main audience, until too much growth happens and you have to move again.
It’s not actually a solution to reddit. It’s not designed to be different, it’s designed to match the past today and then match reddit’s present tomorrow, while being part of a system that’s about the same in past, present, and future.
Last year, this year, and next year, you’re posting somewhere it won’t be seen by many people, and the system that charges people for ambulance rides is getting another year of ambulance ride revenue, facing no organized resistance. There’s no difference here.
Lemmy urgently needs federation between onion service instances and DNS addresses in order to actually do what most users seem to wish it would do: allow discussion outside what the corporate authorities allow, while outgrowing reddit & helping undo the damage social media has done to human communication.
So you want to block people who block people? There’s no corporate centralisation, that’s a huge fundemental difference. Big Daddy’s not there, its more anarchic.
I think I got cancer reading this post.
Lemmy is designed to fail the same way as reddit when reaching the same size
I didn’t ask you about this. Why waste time telling me about it?
It’s failed like Reddit already and is tiny. The sheer amount of botspam, fake accounts, spam instances, etc makes Reddit look curated.
After posting this:
- Several people spammed me and gaslit me for a little while
- Skavau@piefed.social continued spamming, gaslighting; escalated to trying to provoke inappropriate replies; refused to move the discussion to a more appropriate platform when I pointed this out; started threatening to report me for “insults”
- At one point, Skavau@piefed.social slandered Aaron Swartz era reddit (to me, this is basically slandering Aaron Swartz - this is the one thing Skavau absolutely needs to apologize for)
- After dealing with that for about 12 hours, I was banned by sh.itjust.works
- I learned unlike reddit, being banned by a Lemmy instance prevents you from even logging in to archive your inbox or anything like that
- I am now trying to reply from futurology.today, but there are replies from Skavau@piefed.social that I can still see on sh.itjust.works but haven’t been able to find or reply to on futurology.today (while replying to others)
- My hatred for this species has increased 0.001%, leaving that much more of my love for the planet we live on
So, is there an instance I should actually use? Is futurology.today also gonna ban me for “insults” sooner or later?
I’ve probably read less than hald of the comments here, but my main feeling is that the downvotes only happened because they didn’t understood what you said, in their mind you want something even less censored than 4Chan, which will lead to something even worse than 4Chan, they believe that moderation helps in healthy discussions.
I’ve got reserves on that, for example mods should only ask for the user to edit h.er.is comment instead of instabanning them for life without giving it a thought, and as i said elsewhere our states don’t only ask platforms but are making laws to “moderate” the internet.But that’s not what you were talking about, these downvotes should tell you that your thought hasn’t matured enough to be presented as a clear project, like here :
I will not be spinning up instances of anything. I will seed hashes in bittorrent-like P2P networks, I will put my posts where they fit, I will look for posts from others in the most anti-censorship ways I can find, and I will hope devs and server admins create a version of Lemmy that’s fitting for more of my posts - while hurrying toward a possible future where Tor isn’t enough to make Lemmy relevant anymore, because P2P networks become the only place worth posting anything.
At first i was furious because i thought that many people opposed freedom of expression, but after reading more comments i’m relieved that it’s still seen favorably by a majority.
The problem here seems to be that your “vision” isn’t clear enough, and that’s probably why you wanted to discuss it with others. The good news is that people didn’t oppose your ideasIt’s a bit late in France so i don’t intend to stay much more online even if i’d be interested in your answer because i frankly still don’t understand you, sry :/
From what i understood :
- You want instances that can’t block each other, even if you’d probably don’t mind if users can block instances, i’ve seen that same thought in /c/fediverse a few times ;
- You want instances that can’t block each other, even if you’d probably don’t mind if users can block instances, i’ve seen that same thought in /c/fediverse a few times ;
How would this even be possible? This is essentially forced platforming.
I’m saying Lemmy’s censorship is the same as reddit’s because we still have roughly the same groups as on reddit.
I still post to about the same audience or smaller, not bigger than peak reddit.
The people saying “ambulance rides shouldn’t cost money” are still drowned out by the people saying “poor people should die because I’m rich enough to be the one people listen to” so I don’t think we should choose who to listen to based on money.
If reddit worked as a system the authorities could use to control discussion, what we have now with reddit and Lemmy definitely isn’t any less useful for the authorities that way, because I seem to be making slower progress towards making ambulance rides free, instead of faster progress.
I’m saying Lemmy’s censorship is the same as reddit’s because we still have roughly the same groups as on reddit.
I still post to about the same audience or smaller, not bigger than peak reddit.If these two sentences are meant to be understood together, then it’s misleading to use the word censorship i think, it’s more a mix of a lack of visibility and echo chambers, in which case these are two things that don’t seem debatable/false.
If i understood you correctly, could you expand on your solution(, while keeping in mind the comment above) ?then it’s misleading to use the word censorship i think, it’s more a mix of a lack of visibility and echo chambers
But the authorities cause it willingly, so it’s censorship, imo. Maybe debatable
If i understood you correctly, could you expand on your solution ?
Another way of looking at the problem is, without Tor federation, all the federated instances will be 100% one group of people, and each Tor instance will be 100% another group
That 100% isn’t healthy, there needs to be a balance where each place has some of each group. I don’t want a place full of nothing but pedophiles, but I also don’t want a place full of nothing but people who send pedophiles to their own place. I want a place full of nothing but people who agree everyone should be allowed to talk
To do that, would it be enough if instances can’t block each other, or if users could unblock the foreign instances blocked by their original instances ?
To do that, would it be enough if instances can’t block each other, or if users could unblock the foreign instances blocked by their original instance ?
You’d also want some .onion instances, and that they could communicate with those using the DNS.
Absolutely. That all sounds perfect to me. I actually don’t think you’re missing anything
Then the first part(, leaving the choice of blocking an instance to the user,) is a relatively common desire since i’ve already seen it expressed before. If enough people keep asking for it then it may happen.
I’m making a lemmy app and among other things you’ll be able to follow (a group of )users and not only (a group of )communities, sthg reddit will end up adopting probably. And you’ll also be able to display the “All” tab with multiple accounts. So, if you have an account on lemmy.world, as well as on the instances blocked by lemmy.world, then you’ll be able to have access to all instances at once.
You can see the instances blocked by going to sh.itjustworks/instances, or lemmy.ml/instances, and as you can see only very little instances, for spamming i think, were blocked. Which means that you’re probably already seeing 99% of lemmy in your “All” tab ?
And how do you force current instances like lemmy.world or sh.itjust.works then to tolerate /some/ pedophiles exactly?
Because that’s what would have to happen under your system.
And how do you force current instances like lemmy.world or sh.itjust.works then to tolerate /some/ pedophiles exactly?
I don’t get what you mean.
Because that’s what would have to happen under your system.
Again, not sure what you mean.
For crying out loud. You just said: “That 100% isn’t healthy, there needs to be a balance where each place has some of each group. I don’t want a place full of nothing but pedophiles, but I also don’t want a place full of nothing but people who send pedophiles to their own place.”
Now, this implies that the current instances that currently ban pedophiles on sight would be expected to host some amount of them.
I’ve probably read less than hald of the comments here, but my main feeling is that the downvotes only happened because they didn’t understood what you said, in their mind you want something even less censored than 4Chan, which will lead to something even worse than 4Chan, they believe that moderation helps in healthy discussions.
He does. By his own admission he wants quite literally, zero moderation. Except for spam. What do you think that would lead to, honestly? What do you imagine the outcome of that would be? What sort of community would that become?
The problem here seems to be that your “vision” isn’t clear enough, and that’s probably why you wanted to discuss it with others. The good news is that people didn’t oppose your ideas
Almost everyone in this thread opposed him bar a few people.
What do you imagine the outcome of that would be?
Depends, i haven’t understood what he talked about, and neither have you. What if it’s a moderation made by the user h.er.im.self, while taking into account the vote of users with the same “tags”/preferences as him ? That’s not his idea but other methods are possible, in any case it’s aiming for an ideal of freedom, it’s left to us to see the best path in attaining it, and internet is still in its infancy.
Almost everyone in this thread opposed him bar a few people.
And they didn’t understood what he said, and you’re always answering aside
They did. I’m sorry, but they did. Most of them focused on his inane objection to any and all moderation and fundamental misunderstandings of the fediverse and how it actually works. He doesn’t really know anything about it, and makes baseless about what’s happened on the site that he refuses to back up.
But again, the core thing here is that most of the people on the fediverse are not free speech absolutists who want to operate in an instance with no moderation.
I.d.k. if you’ve heard of reclaim the net, you may be interested to give them a follow, and if you know similar websites/accounts i’m interested, thanks for the thread !
(thanks as well to the moderators for allowing you to speak freely, this should be a basic freedom)I hope in the near future you’ll find more of a paying audience than YouTube or Spotify have ever offered you
Nah, i’m stupid sorry, it was a quote from a post by David Rovics, i should have put the «…», my bad.
He’s the only anti-imperialist singer i know, along with Red Creators Network, worth checking out i think :)Got it, will do 🙏
Lemmy urgently needs federation between onion service instances and DNS addresses in order to actually do what most users seem to wish it would do: allow discussion outside what the corporate authorities allow, while outgrowing reddit & helping undo the damage social media has done to human communication.
“allow discussion outside what the corporate authorities allow” apparently meaning “Allow CSAM”
So, until today, you thought the corporate authorities allowed CSAM on reddit?
Or are you just upset that I say what I mean, and mean what I say?
So, until today, you thought the corporate authorities allowed CSAM on reddit?
No, I was pointing out that the “discussion” outside of what the “corporate authorities allow” is according to you, actually just CSAM. I don’t think anyone here wants to “allow” in that.
No, I was pointing out that the “discussion” outside of what the “corporate authorities allow” is according to you, actually just CSAM.
No, you’re just upset I say what I mean, and mean what I say.
I never said CSAM is the only content censored by the authorities.
I don’t think anyone here wants to “allow” in that.
Didn’t ask what you think everyone else thinks.
Also, can I add that Reddit - per its own standards, hasn’t failed. It’s a massive website with a lot of traffic.
We think it’s failing, and poisoning the atmosphere - but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t been a big success. A lot of people on the Fediverse do not aspire to grow to be the size of Reddit, and think thats both unrealistic and undesirable.
Also, can I add that Reddit - per its own standards, hasn’t failed.
Didn’t ask. Why waste time with it?
It’s a massive website with a lot of traffic.
Again, didn’t ask. Why waste time typing this?
We think it’s failing, and poisoning the atmosphere - but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t been a big success.
Again, didn’t ask. Why waste the time?
A lot of people on the Fediverse do not aspire to grow to be the size of Reddit, and think thats both unrealistic and undesirable.
Again, didn’t ask. Got a reason for typing this, other than to waste my time?
Your original post and comments seem to suggest the end-goal of the Fediverse is to get as big as Reddit, and that it failed due to being overly censorious. It didn’t, and it is not the overall goal of the Fediverse.
Your original post and comments seem to suggest the end-goal of the Fediverse is to get as big as Reddit, and that it failed due to being overly censorious.
Incorrect. You’re aware that’s not what I was suggesting, you’re just making shit up and pretending it’s how it “seems” because you’re very dishonest.
It didn’t, and it is not the overall goal of the Fediverse.
Didn’t ask.
I never said CSAM is the only content censored by the authorities.
Okay, what other content are people on the Fediverse unable to talk about and share?
Okay, what other content are people on the Fediverse unable to talk about and share?
What do you mean? People on the Fediverse are able to talk about and share CSAM, so how would stuff they can’t be “other content” in the way you used the words in that sentence?
Do you mean “share widely,” in which case, you know the answer is everything and it’s weird that you’d ask yet another question you know the answer to?
What do you mean? People on the Fediverse are able to talk about and share CSAM, so how would stuff they can’t be “other content” in the way you used the words in that sentence?
No, people are not able to share CSAM on the Fediverse. Doing so gets your account banned.
What specific topics can you not say on the Fediverse, or indeed any website outside of TOR without the threat of being arrested?
No, people are not able to share CSAM on the Fediverse. Doing so gets your account banned.
What do you think “banned” means? It’s not “killed in the past with time travel” or whatever you’re implying.
What specific topics can you not say on the Fediverse, or indeed any website outside of TOR without the threat of being arrested?
According to Trevor Moore, it’s illegal to say “I want to kill the President of the United States of America”
What do you mean by “censorship” and what is your example of the “high-censorship instance” doing it?
This started with me blocking lemmy.world because I heard they defederate “tankie” instances
Better get ready to block sh.itjust.works then too because it also defederates those same instances.
Right. If you read my original post, one of the first things I mentioned was how I looked for a a fully zero-censorship instance/cluster to transition into. Why do you keep needing things repeated?
So why block lemmy.world and not sh.itjust.works when it’s also guilty here?
I don’t know. Is there some reason to do that? My idea seems to make more sense to me.
Or did you mean temporarily, like, why should lemmy.world be first?
You said the reason you blocked lemmy.world was because it blocked the “tankie instances”. Guess what? Sh.itjust.works is exactly the same.
Or did you mean temporarily, like, why should lemmy.world be first?
No, I mean why aren’t you just blocking every instance that blocks those instances.
You said the reason you blocked lemmy.world was because it blocked the “tankie instances”. Guess what? Sh.itjust.works is exactly the same.
Didn’t ask. Why are you wasting time rephrasing this repeatedly?
No, I mean why aren’t you just blocking every instance that blocks those instances.
I can’t answer for whatever proverbial “you” you’re referring to, and it seems like you’re still trying to pretend you can’t remember anything I’ve said, since I’ve been clear the whole time (starting from my original post) that proverbial “you” isn’t me, as you seem to imply it is here.
The no-censorship crowd is funny. “I wanted to block everyone whose admins block someone, in order to find the people whose admins don’t block anyone, so I could talk to the few people I hadn’t blocked because they don’t block people.”
(And that’s ignoring the traditional entitlement in that people somewhere else deciding not to listen to you somehow means you’re censored locally.)
Hypocracy – and conspiracy-level rambling – aside, there’s actually an interesting kernel of commentary here on how we talk about joining and administering Fedi. On the one hand, we say that newcomers shouldn’t worry about which instance to start out on, because every one connects to every other, but on the other we celebrate how the instanced architecture allows admins control over which other instances to connect to. And then you have the deeper issue of the vast majority of the software assuming DNS, so even if admins do want to connect to Tor instances, they can’t feasably do so without a fair bit of host-system tweaking. Yeah, those mixed messages are just the emergent result of which layer of abstraction we’re talking about in any given conversation, but it would be nice if we could find language that doesn’t take literally the opposite tack on each successive layer.
I don’t know how to respond to this comment. Upvoting and leaving a confused reply.
Personally my ideal thing would be an instance that does no blocking and the technology allowing me to block in all ways. I would also like to subscribe to others block lists. I also want blocking to be symetric. When I block or someone blocks me we both effectively do not exist to the other. That being said instances need to block to be in compliance with local laws. In addition I totally understand instances that are about something to block instances which are mean to them. Like if its about lgbtq and anothers about how nazism is the way and another is about christiantiy as a loving accepting faith while another is about christianity being about prosprity doctrine.
Agreement:
I’m glad you support an instance that does no blocking, and instead gives you all the tools
Disagreement:
Custom feeds and labels solve basically the same problems as block lists without being anywhere near as harmful
“Symmetric blocking” as you call it, cannot coexist with public discussion, and is not natural or appropriate for a political “town square”
Real laws are rarely localized, so saying “local laws” makes it sound like you think “laws of man” are real
I think that is bs. Blocking imitates what we do in meatspace. Avoid people we don’t like and hang out with people we do. No one would argue with getting toxic individuals in their life but blocking online is creating a bubble. We need to get back to what is natural. No one has a right for people to view their crap and its fine for them to restrict folks from hearing their crap to. custome feeds and labels do not cut it.
You cannot just make people stop being able to hear you or reply to you in a public place.
The average person could not just avoid every political opinion they disagreed with before the TV was widespread.
Stop ignoring stuff willingly.
You sure can. You avoid them. You don’t go to the places they go. The internet piles everyone together and humans can’t handle that scale. People heard other political opinion from more reasonable people who mixed with different groups that happened to intersect at a place. If the asshole showed up they would leave but the other person would not but they might catch up with the other person and hear some relevant things the asshole had to say. Given the asshole is just an asshole because it rubs the first person the wrong way. Its this middle person that enables the flow.
You sure can. You avoid them.
Avoiding people alone does not make them unable to hear you or reply to you in public places. If you meant “avoiding people and not having any public opinions” then maybe, but before TV, that would have kinda fucked up any attempt at political involvement.
You don’t go to the places they go.
Again, does nothing for the “public places” issue unless you also make sure none of your opinions are public, which is a moot point in the context of trying to make ambulances stop costing money.
The internet piles everyone together and humans can’t handle that scale.
Some humans can. I’m one of them, and I’m trying to help others learn to do the same, before Earth goes extinct. It’s quite urgent.
People heard other political opinion from more reasonable people who mixed with different groups that happened to intersect at a place.
People were more reasonable, but they didn’t magically make their birthplaces match locations full of agreeable people, or have the freedom to live wherever they wanted, or even always have opinions shared by any large group of people anywhere.
It’s this middle person that enables the flow.
This middle person has not solved the problem of people using screens to echo chamber themselves, ever since TVs became widespread.
This middle person was more of a factor back when people spent more time in public places, especially in eras where people felt safer discussing politics, like in the US when it was an anti-Nazi country.
I don’t see what you are not getting if I avoid someone and do my speaking away from them. They don’t hear me and I don’t hear them. To some degree echo chambers have always existed. You go to any random bar and it will often have somewhat of similar attitudes amont the patrons but there will still be lively discussion. One reason is some of the patrons also patronize another bar that others don’t but some of the others patronize a bar the first group does not. Anyway I don’t really care if you like blocking or not but I will be on the technology that allows it and you will be on one that does not so the really great thing is eventually it will be like we blocked each other. Even though I am not looking to block you currently even though I could. So I guess im saying your requirements for what you want your space to be will create an echo chamber for you. The federation is an echo chamber that blocks folks that are only on xitter or facebook or reddit but not necessarily completely as their are communities dedicated to postings stuff from those outside sources (which I personally block). Those people reposting from the other sources are that middle person and although I don’t want to hear the stuff they post from these other social media sites I will still hear things from them that are influenced from hanging in those spaces.
eventually it will be like we blocked each other.
Not symmetrically though. You’ll probably still try to have public political opinions, so I’ll probably still be able to read and respond to those, it would just be you that can’t see my responses. Over time, this should drive pretty much everyone into places without symmetric blocking.
To be clear, you seem chill, so I personally do not intend to talk shit behind your back, or anything like that.
The first sentence of this makes the rest of it seem too long to read.
If you want me to read this, could you give me a shorter reply to read first that just addresses something I said quickly and directly?
I agreed with the title, but then downvoted immediately upon reading your post.
Censorship is not Reddit’s problem. It’s enshittification.
Reddit didn’t fail because Spez has some niche political opinions he pushes and you aren’t allowed to say, it failed because its algorithm/UI is structured to farm users and turn to shit.
Lemmy has major problems and power tripping mods, but its existential issue (IMO) is collapse from spam, trolls, attention algorithms, commercialization, and so on.
But federation is a good first step to avoiding the enshittification traps, like the original internet did until Google/Facebook got such a grip on it.
I think the downvoting of this is showing exactly why Lemmy will fail. Why cant people have a different opinion than most? Why downvote it? You guys love your little bubbles dont you.
I want to also read opinions i dont agree with. It doesnt bother me the slightest.
He can have an opinion, but have you seen how he’s behaving in the replies?
No didnt read it…
Yeah, he’s not behaving with grace.
Nah, he’s being downvoted because he hates censorship, and you’re hence disagreeing/downvoting him.
I think he’s awesome and fully agrees with him.You think I’m the only person downvoting and disagreeing with him?
You fully agree with him? You want CSAM to be on the fediverse?
You was plural, and sry of editing my comment afterwards i haven’t seen your answer.
You want CSAM to be on the fediverse ?
States already make it illegal, and that’s not what he was talking about(, you should know that he expressed himself clear enough).
States already make it illegal, and that’s not what he was talking about(, you should know that he expressed himself clear enough).
No, he explicitly said it here.
Downvoting doesn’t stop you from reading the opinion?
I’ve found that the other replies don’t really express my personal take on this, so I’ll go ahead and write mine down.
First of all, and it’s important, people’s take on such topics is heavily dependent on the country they live in. It’s legitimately hard to imagine why you would want to break government rules hard and be a good person if you live somewhere in Norway. And it’s legitimately hard to imagine a world where you really trust your government and think that the current levels of censorship is actually good if you live in a dictatorship country.
With this in mind, a comfortable and universal level of censorship simply doesn’t exist.
I think the lack of Tor support is valid criticism if you’re in a dictatorship. Of course, DNS-based solutions are not good-enough for you. I hope you’ll find something that solves your problems. Unfortunately a simple Lemmy instance is not a solution for you.
Generally, if I’d advise something, I’d suggest to look at what the project actually aims to do, not at what you think it should be doing. E.g. visit https://join-lemmy.org/ and there it says:
Lemmy is a selfhosted social link aggregation and discussion platform. It is completely free and open, and not controlled by any company. This means that there is no advertising, tracking,…
Well, does it sound like a solution made for people in heavily censored environments? To me – not. If you want to present your case and incentivize the Lemmy devs to ADD another perspective or direction to the software that they’re spending time developing, prepare your case and argumentation well. Explain your situation (e.g. “I’ll be hung if I speak freely where I live”, or more relevant, “my country heavily DNS-censors 90% of the good existing Lemmy instances, I’m deprived of good information you have circling here”), propose some solutions or offer help. I don’t know really. It’s up to you. Good luck with your seach
I explained my situation. I want to shift towards a cluster of zero-censorship instances, but I found out they apparently can’t exist because Lemmy blocks Tor (?), so I’m better off just spending less time on Lemmy.
I don’t care that much if devs fix it, I’m just explaining the problem. If it gets fixed, good; if not, the devs who would fix it will do some other good thing; if that’s not enough for the planet to survive, it’s that there aren’t enough good devs, not that they aren’t focused enough on Lemmy. I hope there are enough good devs for the planet to survive, and also for Lemmy to get fixed, though.
Libbest post of the year here.
You come here complaining this doesn’t meet your made-up expectation of 100% uncensored full audience reach. Who ever said that’s what any of this was?
Since you seem to have such a strong opinion of what the world needs, why don’t you go fucking make it if there’s nothing out there that suffices for your grand vision?
Libbest post of the year here.
What?
You come here complaining this doesn’t meet your made-up expectation of 100% uncensored full audience reach. Who ever said that’s what any of this was?
You, just now, right? I don’t see anyone else accusing me of making those complaints or making that shit up, seems like that was just you in the sentence before you asked?
Since you seem to have such a strong opinion of what the world needs, why don’t you go fucking make it if there’s nothing out there that suffices for your grand vision?
Why are you pretending I’m not, when that’s exactly what my profile shows me doing?
Are you suggesting Project Zymogen and all of its follow-ups should be so easy and fast to finish, there shouldn’t even be time for Lemmy to develop? I don’t think that’s what you’re suggesting, because that would be extremely fucking insane, but the alternative is that you’re just making shit up about me based on nothing and you don’t even know what Project Zymogen is, which is about the same amount insane.
I have no idea what that is and it sounds like you just pulled it out of your ass, but good job. You’re not going to convince anybody here to join your hellhole though. That’s not what lemmy is about.
I have no idea what that is and it sounds like you just pulled it out of your ass, but good job.
I’d thank you if you actually understood what you’re saying, at all. But there’s not one iota of sincerity or comprehension in those words.
You’re not going to convince anybody here to join your hellhole though.
That depends whether I have a hellhole, but I probably won’t have one, indeed. Kinda random though - why’d you bring it up?
That’s not what lemmy is about.
So again, why bring it up, but also why add this part?
are you terminally online?
-
What do you mean?
-
I asked why you brought up whether I’d try to convince people to join a hellhole
-
I asked why you added “that’s not what lemmy is about” to your own topic
yeah ok, anyway, have fun with your zygote project and censorship free whatever
Strange how there are people calling for me to be banned, but not you, while you’re trolling to waste my time, while I’m trying to organize resistance.
-
My biggest request of the Lemmy devs is that they censor people like you specifically.
