They shouldn’t be able to do that!

  • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    This isn’t about me, this is about what people from persecuted minorities have told me they need, when I bought this exact argument to them.

    I used to say what you’re saying them they described to be the harassment that they face

    • FishFace@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      This isn’t about me, this is about what people from persecuted minorities have told me they need, when I bought this exact argument to them.

      The same arguments apply, though.

      Your version of blocking doesn’t exactly handle the problem you’re describing well, either, as someone wishing to spread hate or “off-screen harassment” can block their direct target which, under the model, will mean they can’t see it, and then post.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          You can’t stop other people from badmouthing you behind your back. That’s just life. Accept it and move on. Trying to censor people because you don’t like what they’re saying is peak liberal fascism.

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              lol ah the classic crybaby wannabe-fascist “paradox of tolerance” garbage. Just admit it, you can’t handle people who have different beliefs and opinions to your own because you can’t defend your own with any intelligence.

              Classic leftist.

              • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Ah, the actual fascist “nobody deserves to be safe” garbage. Just adjust it, you want to use your own personal freedoms as a cludge to undermine the rights of others.

                Classic libertarian

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  the actual fascist “nobody deserves to be safe” garbage

                  Everybody deserves to be safe. What are you talking about? Someone badmouthing you behind your back doesn’t make you “unsafe”. Despite what you might try to pretend, words are NOT violence.

                  Just adjust it, you want to use your own personal freedoms as a cludge to undermine the rights of others.

                  How? What am I saying that even remotely hints at anything like this?

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      In that case substitute “they” for “you” in my comment. The meaning remains the same, as does my position.

      • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Oh god, did Lemmy turn into a libertarian hellscape while I wasn’t looking?

        What are your opinions on community bans, since all your arguments apply equally to those. Let me see you rectify those positions.

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          When did an appreciation for free speech become the exclusive domain of the Libertarians? I don’t want you to be able to unilaterally silence me, therefore I’m a Libertarian?

          What are your opinions on community bans, since all your arguments apply equally to those. Let me see you rectify those positions.

          Community bans are the domain of a select few individuals who are responsible for maintaining the overall state of the community. If they abuse their power then the community suffers and people should go elsewhere.

          Personally, I’d rather a system where one could “subscribe” to specific moderators so that if one goes rogue people could choose to unsubscribe from their moderation actions, that would IMO be the best combination of freedom and control. But I can understand that being rather complicated to implement well and perhaps a little confusing for the users, so I’m okay with the current setup as a compromise.

          • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            How is “not letting you see what I personally wrote” consider to be “unilaterally silencing you” ?
            What a mind bogglingly disingenuous response.

            I’m not saying that the reddit style block is good.
            I’m saying that the current “mute” style block hangs vulnerable people out to dry.

            I’m ok trying something else, like maybe what you suggested.

            • notabot@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Bear in mind that evrrything you do or say on the fediverse is public, so there is no possible way to stop someone seeing it. Likewise, because the entire system is federated, there is no way to stop an individual from replying to you. Even if the community server rejected their message their own server would be able to display it.

              This works well for general discussions, but I can see where it isn’t ideal for more sensitive topics. People having those sorts of discussions should probably be using a system that is better suited to their needs.