cacheson
That one had me wondering if it was someone parodying a bot. Given the rest of it though, they'd have to be way more dedicated to the bit than is realistic.
Anyway, back to discussions about chainsaws and related topics:
WONTFIX
To be fair, I think this one is an actual nazi, not a tankie, given the downvotes and the username of "Finnish_nationalisti". Also it's been deleted.
Are you blocking the individual users, or the domain? I've heard that domain blocking is buggy, so try unblocking any domains and see if it helps. It also isn't supposed to block instances, just posts that link to the blocked domain.
Kbin doesn't yet have the ability to transfer ownership of a magazine, so you would need to find a person to be the owner first, and have them create it.
Out of curiosity, what magazines are you looking to make?
yandere_irl
The goal of the copyleft movement (which overlaps heavily with the free software movement) is to carve out an intellectual commons that can't be re-enclosed. This commons is important for a number of reasons, including that it tends to be better for end-users of software in the sense that anti-features can't really gain a foothold. It does not automatically solve UX issues, nor does it stop people from using the knowledge of the commons to do bad things.
Much of the strength of the intellectual commons is that it builds on itself, instead of having to re-invent the same things in a dozen or more different proprietary endeavors. If we were to start a "peace software" movement, it would be incompatible with the commons, due to the restrictions it imposes. Peace software can't build on copyleft software, and none of the commons can build on peace software. These sorts of things were considered, and compatibility was deemed more important than pushing more specific values. This isn't a matter of the FSF or OSI standing in the way, it's just that "peace software" would have to go it alone.
Due to this dynamic, those that want to build "anticapitalist software" would be better served by using the GNU AGPL, rather than a license that restricts commercial use. The AGPL fixes the loophole that the GPL leaves open for network services, and should allow us to carve out a new noncommercial online ecosystem. It should even be used for non-network code, as that code may be repurposed or built upon by network services. I'm glad to see lemmy, kbin, and mastodon using it.
As others have mentioned, hexbear hasn't added us to their list of allowed instances yet. They block everyone by default. I'm definitely in favor of following lemmy.world's lead on this and preemptively defederating them, though.
Kbin does already block lemmygrad, and hexbear is basically just lemmygrad with a vaporwave theme and an even more annoying culture. I imagine this is just a question of when @ernest gets around to blocking them. That could potentially be a while though, so it's probably worth pestering him a bit on this particular issue.
I think you might be looking for the term "head tax", as in each person pays a fixed amount regardless of any other characteristics.