• Melllvar@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I’m not defending the existence of the blocklist… but if you’re really that upset about it then I would suggest asking for a refund.

    • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 hours ago

      We did. That’s why there was a whole public meltdown including a number of alt accounts.

      You another alt?

      • Melllvar@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Did we really, though? Even the OP says they don’t actually care about the blocklist and are just piling on for the lulz.

        • volore@scribe.disroot.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Don’t put words in my mouth. I said, quote, that I wasn’t upset, after you made a comment implying I was and that I should seek out a refund – I don’t use the Tesseract frontend, and never have. That doesn’t mean I “don’t actually care” about someone trying to play Reddit admin and sneakily impose their will onto the rest of the fediverse.

          If you want to make a stupid argument, that’s fine; but make it on your own, don’t rope me into it.

          • Melllvar@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I wasn’t trying to misquote you, but you did imply that entertainment is your primary motivation.

            Quote:

            upset? heavens no, this is terrific free entertainment, this is hilarious to watch.

            To me, this sounds like someone who is pouring gas on a fire just to watch it burn.

            • volore@scribe.disroot.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 hour ago

              Well, today you learned that I can care about something stupid someone else did, and be entertained by how poorly they handled it, all at the same time. I’m glad I could help clarify things for you.

              See, to me, you sound like an alt of AdmiralPatrick, or possibly one of his few remaining friends, and seem to be here exclusively to make passive aggressive comments at his detractors and/or run defense for him. I wonder why that would be…

      • Thales@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Look where this user is based and how many comments they’re making defending AdmiralPatrick…

        • volore@scribe.disroot.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          last I checked, we’re still allowed to be entertained by weird things on the internet. if you aren’t, I recommend a bit more whimsy in your life.

          • Melllvar@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I have no authority over you. So it’s not really a question of me “allowing” you anything.

        • db2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Weird is your bad take combined with your account instance. Tone deaf af.

          • Melllvar@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I just think the reaction from fediverse users has been too harsh when you consider that Tesseract was free and open source software.

            • Goodeye8@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              If your free software is borderline malware (which it is because it’s intentionally depriving users access to certain information with a deliberate attempt hide that fact from the users) I think people have a right to be harsh.

              • Melllvar@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                2 hours ago

                If it is malware then harshness is justified, but I’d be willing to debate over the strict definition of malware and whether it technically applies here.

                But I don’t think most of the harshness we’ve seen is actually borne of that kind of outrage. Even the OP of this meme says they are not upset and are having a wonderful time.

                • Goodeye8@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 hour ago

                  I never said it’s strictly malware, I said borderline malware. It can’t be strictly malware because most definitions of malware focus on the malware taking (some or full) control of the system or extracting valuable information, things that generally pose as a direct threat of damage to the end user or system.

                  But restricting user access to information without the user knowing information is being restricted and taking deliberate steps to hide this is being done in the first place is all malicious behavior. If you asked from a layman if this should be considered malware behavior or not most people would consider this malware behavior, hence borderline malware.

                  And I don’t see how it not being “strictly malware” would change anything. People are outraged by what it is doing and how it is doing it, not by whether it fits the strict definition of malware.