What’d I miss?
apparently its an enemy list of a POS lemmy facist.
It is a list of all the cool people in lemmy
Also a pretty awesome band https://www.tesseractband.co.uk/
Just some Lemmy web front end that rolls with some instances for which the admin injected a block list for accounts that are unapologetically pro-trans and/or leftist. People, myself included, are on that block list. There is much more to it but that’s the jist.
The block list is cringe lol. It reads like something a snowflake libertarian or centrist would make to isolate themselves from reality so they can live out their lives in delusion. 🙉 🙈 🙊
Exactly, it is delusional to assume you need some smoking gun to assume intent. There are others here using that line of logic to assume no bad intent. The logic is quite clear in the screed that the tesseract admiral put out there to defend themselves.
It’s also not in the spirit of what Lemmy is. Admins of instances are the ones that should have a say in their rules and tools. If you want to add a “Toxic Mode,” make it something the admin is not automatically opted into. Also, it’s pretty cowardly to not state the why behind any of this when it was created, and no community discussion. All the Tesseract dev has done is alienate themselves from the entire Lemmy community, except for the weird isolationist ones that just magically happen to have views that often align with conservatives and fascists.
This is what I feel is the biggest issue, the deception.
The fact that there’s a blacklist is almost inconsequential to the fact that it’s not explicitly stated, that it’s default applied AND the error message when you run into it implies it’s not from a blacklist.
Lies by omission are still lies no matter how much Patrick is crying about it always being there. If you’re not upfront about it, for something as incendiary as a shadowban list, especially for a community like lemmy, you’re a piece of shit and deserve to be ostracized.
If he had made it all transparent, we’d still make fun of him but at least he would be honest about it and give people the choice to decide for themselves.
How do you know that you are on the list?
Here it is, I don’t see you on it.
Damn. I guess I’m a bigot.
Try using more of the banned words, like ACAB and Perchance.
Or try asking directly. The dev posted a
tantrumexplanation here: https://lemmy.today/post/57096701Thank you for the link. And jfc what a nuclear meltdown. He sure sounds much more ‘normal’ than regular Lemmy users, which according to him nowadays consist of people not allowed anywhere else online. I’m sure he has the right temperament for attracting ‘normies’ and ‘save the fediverse from itself’ as he puts it, lol
No problem.
It’s too bad because it’s perfectly fine for instances, and I suppose apps, to cater their experience. Beehaw was open about their intentions from the beginning and as far as I know, no one gives them shit.
The lack of clear guidelines on who or what gets banned and the near obfuscation of what was being banned made this so much more than it had to be.
So just the usual stupidity then. Cool. Wish people could just act normal. Diversity is a natural thing and to deny it is insanity.
You’re probably blocked now for saying that.
Isn’t the whole of blahaj blocked anyway? The dev who implemented this is an asshole of the first order. Implementing a broad block list without the knowledge of the users is one thing, but the statement they gave afterwards, my god, what a knob.
Good?
Yeah, it is a sign that you are a good and decent person IMO.
Awesome, do I get a club card? Is there a badge? Do we have weekly or monthly meetings? ;)
you just know he totally comes here on another instance to read the responses anyway
we seeeee you
how else would he get his little peepee hard enough if he doesn’t feel belittled?
That’s a big distortion. They are accounts that advocate violence or other problematic political views. Many of them are also LGBT, but that’s not why they are on the block list.
I do think it’s problematic for a client/frontend to default-block any group of individuals or instances at all, but portrayimg it as motivated by bigotry when it’s not is pretty messed up too.
Aw, you poor widdle soul. Stating they are advocating “problematic political views” is just telling on yourself, isn’t it?
You’re right, I should specify (although the condescension is not helping your case). They are views deemed problematic by the Tesseract dev.
I’ve had run-ins with other devs or instance admins who find my views problematic, and banned me from their community/instance/whatever. That’s unfortunate, but it’s transparent. People know who the petty tyrants are and act accordingly.
This is something different.
Having a frontend preemptively blocking users and instances based on the sole judgment of the dev is unprecedented AFAIK. We don’t need to invent intimations of bigotry to see why this is wholly bad for the platform. It goes against basic principles of transparency, openness, and free choice that the Fediverse is based on.
I believe that a front-end (client) should be a tool to access the service/network. It shouldn’t be making content decisions. If someone wants to make a block list and publish it for others to use, that’s great. If someone wants to trust an admin for content curation/blocking, well… that’s how this whole thing works. People choose or change instances based largely on that trust. But to have a tool for accessing the network also modifying the content? That’s bad, and a bad precedent.
You didn’t see the Tesseract admin’s deleted rant then huh.
Not sure. I only saw this.
The TL;DR is TL
Oh you did. Hmm. Thanks for posting the link, I thought it was lost by deletion.
but portrayimg it as motivated by bigotry when it’s not is pretty messed up too.
Explain to me the non-bigoted reason for blocking the entire lemmy.blahaj.zone instance (which predominantly trans), as well as blocking various terms related to queer identities. (Hint: there isn’t one, fuck this guy.)
They are accounts that advocate violence or other problematic political views.
My username appears on the list and I don’t believe my comment history aligns with this statement at all. I believe my username is just unique enough to not have another instance of it. Selection of some usernames do not appear to support their (admiralpatrick) claims of violence advocation nor extreme political views.
You could have said something as innocuous and logical as trans folks have the right to defend themselves or a thousand other violence adjacent notions. Objection to violence outright is just navel gazy utopic thinking. It sounds nice but it isn’t practical reality. There is always a line.
See, THIS is the issue I wish people would focus on. The dev of a pretty important frontend has set up a block list. They have made it the default. They have not applied a clear and equitable criteria, set up a community feedback channel, or any sort of crowdsourced input.
The modlog is open, meaning that anyone can see exactly what moderators and admins (generally) are up to. People can (and do) push back when things decisions are punitive, arbitrary, or unclear.
This is not that. You have no way to see why your username was included, or correct it if it was in error. There is no community feedback to direct what standard makes sense.
That’s the problem. It’s draconian. By manufacturing some shrill accusations of bigotry, yeah, it makes a lot more flashy posts, but doesn’t help in addressing the issue. If we can’t accurately name problems, we can’t solve them. We are just a mob on a witch-hunt.
Guessing you checked the list for your name again right before posting this lol
Why would you believe that reasoning? This guy is your friend or something?
Nope, I’m just a rational person who doesn’t automatically buy into hysteria.
Believing without questioning some shit you read on the Internet is the last thing I would call rational
In my experience anonymous people online don’t hide their bigotry behind an eloborate 10-point system. In this case, yes. I believe the motivation is exactly as it’s presented.
The fact that the dev clearly thinks it is a fair justification shows exactly the mindset. The problem is bad enough on its own without making up additional poorly founded accusations.
Now you’re just making up shit that I supposedly believe. The far more likely explanation for them doing this is “whatever reason they have at the time for not liking someone”.
Nope, I’m just a rational person who doesn’t automatically buy into hysteria.
Wow you’re so much smarter and better than everyone, you’re so cool(🖕)
Take all the time you need.
What is it motivated by?
well, now I’m insulted that I wasn’t on that list.
I’m sad I didn’t make the cut, but last I checked, I was the only active user on my instance lol. Like a one-man sloop in an ocean of clippers.
Sure, I could shut it down and just register elsewhere, but I keep it around as my service to an open web free from fascist and corporate control.
I know, me too! At least there is comfort in knowing he can’t shut us all up.
PRO-CHOICE 🩷 PRO-TRANS 🩷 ANTI-MAGA ❌ ANTI-ISRAEL ❌
You’re on my approved list ✅
As am I
Didn’t we have this discussion before on Lemmy? I remember seeing a blocklest in some frontend before. Was that something else than Tesseract?
Ah, Lemmy and refusing to be exposed to opinions you disagree with. Classic.
Someone’s existence is not to be debated. It’s not an opinion to agree or disagree with. The frontend’s creator needs to learn that lesson.
The creator’s probably anti-trans and is blocking communities he disagrees with, I don’t think they are debating the existance of trans people just being a dickhead
I think he is simply MAGA and blocking anyone that is against Trump.
So they’re a loser, then? Gotcha.
True, but you can’t block something that doesn’t exist.
Blocking it acknowledges it.
deleted by creator
This guide page goes into what an alternative UI is, and some of the popular ones that are available. It is a little out of date,
lemmy.ca also dropped tesseractwe are no longer hosting Tesseract for lemmy.cahttps://fedecan.ca/en/guide/threadiverse/alternative-uis
The controversy around tesseract is better explained elsewhere, but it boils down to a questionable blocklist that the dev was injecting into the tool, without it being made apparent to the users or admins
How can an instance drop support for a fronted?
I’ll edit that comment for clarity
We host a few of the frontends on our own infrastructure, which improves performance for users, among other benefits like reducing strain elsewhere. It’s also easy for our local users to remember that
old.lemmy.cagoes to the old interface,photon.lemmy.cato photon,blorp.lemmy.cato blorp etc. We are taking down the Tesseract one.Thanks, that makes a lot more sense.
deleted by creator
🖐️
Same, and really IDGAF
Gave enough to comment.ironic.
It’s slow right now, man. Give it a week or so and they’ll find Mitch McConnell’s body in a river somewhere or something and we’ll be right back to our usual.
I think it has something to do with moths…
