Flatworm7591

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
 

Hi again mateys!

As most of you are probably aware, since the development of Lemvotes Lemmy votes are no longer private for users.

The way lemvotes works right now afaik, is it uses an admin level account to collect voting data from all federated instances, thus enabling the identification of every voter. This method effectively bypasses the guardrails the developers put in place to keep this info more restricted.

However, the developer of lemvotes has recently developed an "opt out" for instances that don't want their user data collected in this way. So now we have a choice of whether or not to continue. For total transparency, I asked the developer to create an opt out because I wanted to give our users the option to choose that path without defederating from the lemvotes instance.

I think there are (at least) two schools of thought on this topic, which I will attempt to succinctly summarize below:

  1. Votes should be kept private to users as they were only ever meant to be viewable by instance admins. Making votes public to everyone via lemvotes, when users have a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to voting, is a betrayal of user trust. It also leads to arguments and a lot of unnecessary drama, caused by users trawling though each others' vote histories.

  2. It's good that voting is transparent and that users have the same tools available as admins to conduct their own investigations into other users. This creates a level playing field and helps hold everyone accountable for their voting patterns.

So now you have some of the context, I'd like to ask our community what are your thoughts on lemvotes... is it a social good or a bad idea?

Personally, I quite like it from an admin perspective - it's a handy tool, and a pretty cool project. But I also have an expectation (mainly from other forms of social media) that users' votes should be kept private from other users, so I still think it's problematic from that perspective.


Proposal: To opt out of lemvotes, so that our users' voting data is kept (at least somewhat) private.

  • To vote FOR the proposal to succeed, upvote the post.
  • To vote AGAINST the proposal, downvote the post.

This will be a simple majority vote. Similar to the last governance topic, I have no clue what the instance sentiment is towards lemvotes, so let's find out! Feel free to add your comments below.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/39603992

if one of these is your particular Senator, and you can spare energy for a call, free fax (send with FaxZero), or email telling them exactly what you think of them supporting & enabling a genocidal apartheid state... please do.

these people have names and addresses. it's time for some accountability.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

PTB. Once you get the joke, it's a funny meme. And if you can't even poke fun at Stalin on .ml then who can you poke fun at?

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Running terrible, unpopular candidates is kind of their whole schtick though. So it might well happen.

 

The Democrats will never get behind anything until it's mainstream. They are the new conservative party while the Republicans are busy fantasizing about the Fourth Reich. Maybe now they will finally start to move in the right direction? Doubtful, but I'm trying to be optimistic.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/50020239

Late to the party or now forced to admit it?

Archived Safe Link

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Level up and try it with beer.

It's pretty based of them tbh

56% of Americans opposed Trump’s bombing. Why wasn’t this reflected in the range of opinions presented by America’s top press outlets?

Because those media outlets are more concerned with shareholder profit than with speaking truth to power.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Credit where it's due, Goat did remove PJ and agree that the ban reasons were invalid, so that shows good faith. And other bad mods exist, if we have to say that :p

IDK why I’m continuing at this point [...]

I was wondering the same thing tbh. Ciao.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Exactly this. Xenopronouns are just as valid as any other pronoun. PJ and Philip seem to be mostly ok with "traditional" (lol) trans pronouns like "xir/xe" or "they/them" so they think they are good trans allies. But they are only allies to certain types of "mainstream" trans folks. Because everything has to be mainstream before a Democrat will ever consider supporting it, in my experience. The moment the pronouns get "too weird" they all start freaking out. Xenopronouns? Forget about it! I've even seen it argued that xenopronouns are anti-trans (somehow)? Who knows, but it seems there's a bunch of LW folks who seem to be that its fine to hate on folks who use them.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 days ago (11 children)

I stand by my mod actions on SoftestSapphic. Folks can make their own assessment without having to suffer through your opinion.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Where's the receipts?

 

An internal U.S. government analysis found no evidence of systematic theft by the Palestinian militant group Hamas of U.S.-funded humanitarian supplies, challenging the main rationale that Israel and the U.S. give for backing a new armed private aid operation.

The analysis, which has not been previously reported, was conducted by a bureau within the U.S. Agency for International Development and completed in late June. It examined 156 incidents of theft or loss of U.S.-funded supplies reported by U.S. aid partner organizations between October 2023 and this May.

It found "no reports alleging Hamas" benefited from U.S.-funded supplies, according to a slide presentation of the findings seen by Reuters.

A U.S. State Department spokesperson disputed the findings, saying there is video evidence of Hamas looting aid, but provided no such videos.

 

Although it's a bit contrary to the spirit of this community, I've got to hand it to the Dems on this manoeuvre - it was a cool move, so credit where its due.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/48555917

https://archive.ph/UB7sb (archived Xitter Link)

The GOP chair was caught off guard and scrambled—first delaying the vote, then trying to sabotage it by adding amendments to include Biden administration communications. Democrats called their bluff and agreed.

Then the GOP chair, Rep. Higgins, lied, claiming the motion FAILED until Rep. Robert Garcia forced a full roll call vote.

Ultimately, the vote passed 8-2 after 3 Republicans DEFIED their leadership and joined all 5 Democrats to pass the motion.

 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.nl/post/38810430

‘For the first time in more than eighty years, reporters of the renowned press agency Agence France-Presse (AFP) are under threat of dying of hunger. The labour union of the news organisation called the alarm on Monday about the ten Palestinian AFP workers in Gaza.’ (Non-translated archive link). It’s fairly easy to have pages automatically translated these days, and otherwise only English-language media are represented here, where the vast majority of European media obviously isn’t English-language. This is relevant to this community as it’s about journalists employed by a European news agency and newspapers.

‘They receive a salary, but are hardly able to work because of the high food prices and inhumane conditions. “My body is thin and I can’t work anymore”, the exhausted photographer Bashar (30) said on Facebook last weekend.

“Since the founding of AFP in August of 1944, we lost journalists during conflicts and have had people wounded and imprisoned within our ranks”, the union writes in the Monday communiqué, “but not one of us remembers seeing a colleague die of hunger.” Without “immediate intervention”, the message continues, “the last reporters in Gaza will die. [...] We refuse to let that happen.”’

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/33434037

For anyone hoping Kamala Harris’s disastrous 2024 loss would make the Democratic Party drastically change direction, the bad news can be summed up in two words: Project 2029.

The New York Times reported earlier this month that Democrats are planning their own version of the right-wing policy blueprint that is the driving engine of Donald Trump’s presidency, which they’ll roll out piecemeal each quarter for the next two years in one of the party’s intellectual organs, Democracy: A Journal of Ideas. The man leading the effort is also that journal’s founder and coeditor: Andrei Cherny, a New Democrat wunderkind and (briefly) former Arizona Democratic party chair, who claims to have put together a team that’s “the Avengers of public policy.”

[...]

That starts at the very top with Cherny himself, whose most recent project before this was a scandal-ridden corporate venture. For nine years, Cherny was the chief executive of celebrity-backed fintech firm Aspiration, which claimed to be democratizing investing by making it affordable for ordinary people and, in the process, being “in the business of fighting the climate crisis.”

In reality, as a series of exposés from ProPublica and others made clear, the firm sold itself through pathological deception: it boasted that it had planted thirty-five million trees, but counted twenty-three million that hadn’t actually been planted; it claimed that it had five million customers, but the actual number was a little less than six hundred thousand; it let customers round each purchase up to pay for planting a tree, but often pocketed many of the proceeds; it rewarded purchases from companies it deemed sustainable, but were in reality often pollutive; it trumpeted the chance to pay no fee on its investment fund, but actually charged a higher fee than many better performing funds; and far from being “one hundred percent fossil-fuel free,” that fund invested least in renewable energy while owning shares in a number of dirty companies.

[...]

The details of a lawsuit lay bare the less-than-sustainable reality of the industry into which Cherny had steered the firm. In order to ink a lucrative deal with oil-soaked Qatar for the 2022 FIFA World Cup — which was itself a tour de force of greenwashing — Aspiration needed a pile of carbon credits quickly, leading it to do what one executive called “a light version” of the due diligence it would have normally done on a deal that big. Perhaps as a result, the seller never delivered on the $30 million worth of credits they had agreed to.

All of this is a grim prelude to understanding Cherny’s political work, the cause of his life until the nine-year break he took for this ill-fated business venture. Cherny is a loud and proud evangelist for, and former member of, the Bill Clinton administration that laid much of the groundwork for the rise of Trump and the Democrats’ loss of working-class voters, as well as an alum of the corporate-funded Democratic Leadership Council, which was maybe best known for its enthusiasm for privatizing Social Security.

Cherny first showed up on Clinton’s radar as a Harvard senior, when he wrote that the United States needed “government humble enough not to try to solve all our problems for us but strong enough to give us the tools to solve our problems for ourselves.” Clinton loved the line so much, he made his entire Cabinet read it, put it in one of his speeches, and hired Cherny as a speechwriter. He was a perfect fit for an administration that had embarked on its own Democratic version of Trump’s DOGE initiative, called “Reinventing Government,” which boasted of firing three hundred fifty-one thousand federal workers and eliminating hundreds of thousands of pages of rules and regulations. (Some of those Clinton-era powers for carrying out this cull are now being used by Russell Vought to dismantle the federal government at Trump’s behest.)

Cherny cheered on all of it, rejoicing that Clinton had become his “true self”: not “a wild-eyed liberal mad with desire to insert the shadowy hand of the federal government into every nook and cranny of American life,” but a “raging centrist” who purged progressives, pushed budget cuts, and collaborated with Republicans. His “best period as president,” Cherny wrote, came “with Reinventing Government and the extraordinary passage of NAFTA,” and he celebrated that Clinton had cut the deficit, “eliminated scores of government programs,” and made the government “the smallest it has been since John F. Kennedy was president,” insisting that “centrist politics” is “what Americans want now” and “what they have always wanted.”

[...]

In what may be a sign of Cherny’s role in Project 2029, he wrote the Democrats’ losing 2000 platform in a process that was praised for its lack of debate and input from the dreaded “groups,” and its resulting centrist direction, full of “positions that easily could have come from Republican platforms of a generation ago,” as the Los Angeles Times put it. That included support for the death penalty and “open trade,” a boast that Democrats had “ended the era of big government,” and a vow to eliminate the national debt in twelve years.

Cherny beamed with pride that the document’s hawkishness showed “the shift in the party on national security” and that “the old siren songs no longer have a place.” Later, as the country faced whiplash from George W. Bush’s disastrous series of Middle East invasions, Cherny took the side of rabid war-hawk Joe Lieberman, who complained that Democrats were no longer talking about expanding the size of the military, but pulling out of Iraq. There was “a large grain of truth” in what Lieberman was saying, said Cherny, and he predicted that the eventual Democratic nominee would return to themes like “expanding democracy around the world and using force to advance American values.”

 

Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York City’s mayoral primary last month has resulted in absolute meltdowns from billionaires, genocide supporters, and other assorted defenders of the status quo. Let’s pause for a moment to enjoy them.

 

Update: Although we officially still have a few days remaining on this vote, it seems clear that this proposal won't be voted in.

Thanks to everyone for their feedback and votes! I had expected a split vote on this one and it turned out around 1/3 for the proposal and 2/3 against, so that is a quite emphatic no! And of course, we will respect the vote.

I hope we can maybe revisit our instance blocking policies more generally after lemmy has properly working per-user instance blocks, as some folks commented as it will open up more options for personal choice. For example, we could keep a list of sanctioned instances (like csam site) as it works now, but maintain a separate list of "use with caution" instances (aka hesitations in fediseer) that are blocked by default in each user's personal blocklist. But now users could choose to enable those sites for themselves if they wanted to.

For me, that seems like the best overall solution for user choice, and for the new user experience. But it may not sound good to you folks, so that's why we have the voting system in place so we can get quality feedback and also hopefully generate ideas for improvements that will benefit the community.

On that note, anyone can contact me or any of the site admins if they have a proposal they want to appear here on the governance community, and we'll be happy to help you out.

Unruffled


Hi mateys. I'm gonna keep this short and sweet because I don't really have any skin in the game on this one. I am in fact quite happy to leave this decision up to the wider dbzer0 community. On that note, please do not comment on this post unless you are a dbzer0 user - we'd prefer not to have anyone else weighing in.

This post isn't to convince anyone to re-federate or otherwise. In fact, our admin team genuinely doesn't know for sure what our community sentiment is on the topic, or whether or not it's worth a try. My guess is that the community will be quite divided on the topic, as many users are on the topic of hexbear. But the only way to find out for sure is to ask you, so here we are.

But I will say that for me personally, although we still have the occasional drama, and despite past run-ins, I have slowly grown to appreciate having some hexbear users around to help balance out all the turbolibs. While I think its fair to say our instance and theirs will never see eye-to-eye on certain topics, we have coexisted with them in relative calm over the past 12 months. If we can achieve ~~harmony~~a ceasefire with hexbear, then maybe we could do the same with lemmygrad?

I'd also prefer our users to make their own choices with regard to instance blocking of leftist sites in particular.

Obviously there will be some folks here that will hate this idea, and some who think it is worth a try and/or would like to make their own choices with regards to blocking. All I will ask is that you go have a look at lemmygrad.ml before you vote, and ask yourself if there is anything posted there you think warrants keeping them defederated?

Because this might be a divisive topic, I'm setting the threshold for this proposal succeeding at >66.6% majority rather than the default >50% so that there is a clear mandate.

The proposal is as follows:

That dbzer0 removes lemmygrad.ml from our blocked instances list for a 1-month trial period. Another vote will then be conducted to either federate permanently or to reinstate the instance block.

Notes

  • AFAIK none of our admins have discussed this with lemmygrad prior to this post, so we don't know how they will respond, even if this vote succeeds. But having just checked, we are not currently blocked from their end, so in theory re-federating will be a straightforward process (at least technically).
  • We really don't want to cause a big rift in our instance over this, so please there is really no need to get into heated arguments (I mean, what are the chances? Lol). Your vote is what counts most and we will commit to be guided by the voting outcome.
  • If this vote succeeds we will reach out to their admins to see if we can come to some mutual agreement about reintegrating our communities while hopefully keeping conflict to a minimum. Having said that, some conflict is probably inevitable ngl. But I think we will be able to ride it out ok.
  • I've covered a lot of concerns and talked about conflict a lot, so I'll just add that the big positive of re-federating is that there will be a ton of new users and content to interact with, which will hopefully add to the Lemmy experience for our users if the proposal is voted in.

expiry: 7

 

A familiar breed of British pundit has resurfaced - loud, self-declared feminists whose outrage is as selective as it is performative, and whose moral compass somehow always aligns with western state power.

They remain silent as Gaza burns, but are quick to find their voice to cheer on Israel and its allies as they threaten to flatten Iran - civilian casualties be damned.

During Israel's recent strikes on Iran, the radical feminist journalist and co‑founder of Justice for Women, Julie Bindel, branded leftist anti-war feminists "Team Iran" sympathisers. It was a disingenuous, grotesquely misleading and dangerously ideological accusation, but not a surprising one.

What we're witnessing goes beyond reasoned critique - it is the cynical weaponisation of feminism to uphold state violence.

This is no isolated incident. It's a pattern.

view more: next ›