M0oP0o

Ah thanks for sharing the source!

Really that is helpful.

so as ada (the person you are claiming has shown you the light) said:

The Fediverse though, even though it has hate filled cesspits, gives us tools that put barriers between vulnerable groups and those spaces. The barriers are imperfect, they have booked holes and be climbed over by people who put the effort in, but they still block the worst if it.

In fact reading this I don't think ada (we could just ask them) would take the same position as you on this. They are talking about overall systems and that public systems are not safe for people who have to hide their identity (I don't 100% agree but do see the point). I would not try to put words into their mouth, and I would not use a conversation from 2 years ago in vague memory to argue a point.

Actually lets ask them @Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone , discourse is healthy after all and like most users on this platform they likely have something of substance to say.

i mean, i’ve linked you to the conversation I had.

You have? I must have missed it, could you re paste it?

have you tried to talk to anyone about it? or are you just some white dude confidently saying that nobody should change anything because it works for you, so it should work for everyone else?

Odd, not sure what you are getting at. Talk about what? Are you sure you are replying to the right person. Also please continue to try and guess my gender, race, and world view, since it is clear you want to paint me in a way that you can disregard my statements. You wish to make me less then human, so please do.

They are not overworked and ineffective, at least not all. And no people can make conclusions on others based on their actions and words, you are not able to stop that.

This is not harassment. If you feel otherwise please use the tools provided and report.

My mind is going in overdrive thinking of the possibilities on this. This is like the argument equivalent of trying to pay with an IOU. "I have the best reasons, but you don't know them as they live in another country" sort of stuff.

I am thinking there are a few possibilities (please add if you can, this is fun):

• There is no group in question and its just a lame tool to try and win an argument.
• The group in question did/does have issues with harassment, but does not have an opinion on this exact thing (so they are not being named as the poster knows they will not get support)
• The group is so very unpopular that the very mention of them will lower the credibility of the poster (hexbear, pedophiles, people who don't put their carts back, etc.)
• The group is not being harassed at all, but like the poster does not like that people can criticize them

True, but you can see who mods what community and it means hiding there name is often pointless. I do agree that the name should be on the modlog though.

Yeah, this is just a wild take so far. They keep rolling out that it needs to happen to protect minorities from harassment, but don't elaborate, at all. Not how having clearly abusable tools in the hands of every user would help, not on who the minority group is and how they are being harmed (just that they are! and are upset about it!), and instead of elaborating in anyway on this they just keep making up augments against them that no one has made.

They need to just make there own community at the very least. Its not hard, and would give them all the power they want and are asking for. But I assume since it would not give them the people automatically they will not.

Exactly, its why modlog and communities that exist just to bring up mod issues are a needed part of a healthy fediverce.

The idea that someone should be able to control what another user types without oversite is just megakaren levels of entitlement over others.

They would likely not like or agree with what the moderator decided, as moderators are ether fairly hands off unless needed or hated by the community. They want the ability to police others just due to them conversing with them.

You are (I know this is a shock) not the centre of the internet. Your inability to police what other people say is not a bug, but a feature.

Please go make your own place where those minorities (whoever they are) can do whatever they want.

• Them before you put words in their mouth to make a terrible argument.

No, it is not.

Because as soon as you post, it is not your content. Because it is a site build around public discourse, there is no dichotomy here let alone a false one. Because there are anti-harassment tools in place, you just want a new way to harass.

Defederation exists

Instance bans exist

Community bans exist

Why are all of those good, but individual bans aren’t?

Why are all of those effective (at least partially), but not for individuals?

Or is the argument that all of those should be disposed of, too?

Because they are not done by end users in a vacuum. You can go and make your own instance and do all of these things, and are encouraged to do so.