anarchiddy

Well that wouldn't make any sense at all - blowback isn't a description of something you wanted to have happen that you didn't expect, it's a description of something you didn't want to happen that you didn't expect

Like the militant extremists you supported fracturing into new adversarial militants that fuck your shit up later.

Are we taking about the same comment here? Where did I contradict you?

I can't say for sure but I think you've mistaken me for someone else.

I wonder if there's a term for these kind of 'unintended' consequences to reckless foreign subterfuge

I dont fault anyome for being rubbed wrong by this type of mod action, but I've personally come to terms with it. There are a couple of comms whose entire premis is built around preemptive bans (i think 'pleasant politics' is one.

I dont think we need to pretend that mods are omniscient and perfect in their interpretation of behavior outside their comms, only that they are ultimately responsible for trying to build their communities, and sometimes that means fighting against popular sentiment. Being proactive about banning people who have a clear distaste for your content - whatever that looks like - isn't unreasonable IMO. Especially when there's precedent of people seeking out a mod to harass them.

As long as mods arent fomenting a community of hate or using their authority to hurt other people, I say we give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to preemptive bans.

A simple toggle, secured with a password would do it.

Yea, that's the thing - I don't think it would 'do' it for legislators. Like you mentioned - it's not really about protecting children, but also the only way to enforce a law like this would be to log or register devices to specific people or children. This would essentially just shift the point of verification from the individual website to the point of sale of the phone or tablet. Verifying the age is the part that necessitates identification - the only thing a hardware-locked strategy does is centralizes that verification to a governing body instead of individual websites, but it still associates individuals with specific devices.

I get why this might seem preferable, but the problem of online privacy still persists.

I'm so tired of this civility meta.

Lemmy is half as uncivilized as any other social media space I've ever been in, including reddit or Twitter. I think people are just confused by a lack of centralized authority to settle disputes on what is or isn't 'civil' behavior - but it certainly isn't the case that it's any less civil than just about any alternative.

Maybe this places extra stress on instance admins for constantly addressing complaints of users on and off their server, but that has less to do with the kind of user civility people are talking about and more with a culture of mob justice evidenced by communities like MoG and PTB.

People seem uncomfortable with multipolar systems, and maybe it's because of my political bent but I think distributed systems are way better.

I don't think this is a good idea...

This is even more invasive - it would mean all the traffic and activity in every device would be traceable to a registration. Whereas now they might have a pretty good lock on individual device ids, they'd then have an actual registry of devices and owners to verify it against

K but who gets the fatwa? The doctor?

echoed quite a bit of what I’ve been saying about .ml, the Triad, general toxicity of their Tankie “ideology” for months now.

Sorry, how is his post at all about the 'triad'?

Frankly, I think it's the constant attempts at instigating flame wars that I find to be so grating, not the users with opinions I find distasteful. I have no idea what ptz's specific experience was like, but seeing a prominent anti-tanky crusader project their personal vendetta onto this announcement is the kind of shit I find myself constantly rolling my eyes at.

Federated social media is built to facilitate community between people of different preferences, and it's exactly this constant crusading that's likely to extinguish it. You think you're on a mission of purification but it looks more like you're extinguishing what little enthusiasm there was for lemmy to begin with. Defederation is absolutely a tool for moderation, but making it your entire mission to push for it in every space you participate in is itself a suffocating cancer.

Let people decide for themselves what instances they want to commune with and stop pestering the entire platform into reflecting your personal tastes.

I'm clearly in the minority here, but I'm in favor of a trial refederation.

Support.

Yes, and they are not required to run in a primary because those are run by each party (being independent means you don't have a party to begin with)

There's no limit (AFAIK) to the number of candidates on the ballot, but there is a deadline to file and that deadline has passed. Cuomo had preemptively filed as an independent candidate in case he didn't win the primary (I think Mamdani did this too), but had not publicly stated whether he would use it until now.