@terryenglish Even Gab?
@juliobiason Yes even Gab. If the end users don't like it they are perfectly capable of muting the domain. If people wanted admins taking away their choices they'd go back to Facebook and Twitter.
> If people wanted admins taking away their choices, they'd go back to Facebook and Twitter
May be true for some users, but others (like me) don't want to do all the blocking and are looking for an instance that maintains a blocklist for them. We have the choice to choose an instance that doesn't block at all, or blocks on a level we are fine with.
@tofuwabohu I suppose I would be okay with something like this if it was a small instance and there was a general consensus among the users about which instances to not federate with but on an instance of the size you're on I doubt that's the case.
@terryenglish I believe there have been some polls once when gab came up and there was some kind of consensus.
If users were so keen on blocking themselves, they would mass emigrate to instances without or with minor block lists. But that doesn't happen. At least in my bubble people prefer to join an instance with active moderation, including blocking certain instances. I've even witnessed some migrations specifically for that reason.
I see your point but I don't agree it's "what users want".
@tofuwabohu That's partially why I think it's important to change hearts and minds. Once this place starts to fail to deliver on what it promises it will forever be condemned to irrelevance.
@juliobiason I wanna follow Sam Hyde
For users of noagendasocial.com, the fediverse is already broken.
We're blocked by all big instances except quodverum, foxfam, and gab. I had to block the latter 2 because of the noise level.
I might have to come back via a self hosted instance, to escape my collective punishment!
@terryenglish I'd rather have the instance block super spam bots and junk than have to manually do that myself. Don't want to get millions of follow requests overnight because someone gets a stick in their butt. :V
@terryenglish join a less shitty instance
@pounce My instance is just fine. As far as I know the administrators haven't de-federated due to being butt hurt or having their feeling hurt.
@terryenglish other instances defederate with librem.one because it's crap
if you have a problem with that move to a less shitty instance
@pounce Care to elaborate?
they cloned mastodon. changed the logo. charged for it and removed the report feature.
purism is a company that leeches off of free software projects. All they've done here is copied code other people have worked hard to make, and decided to sell it while taking zero responsibility for moderating the server.
If you can't see why people wouldn't want to deal with that i can't help you.
A) They don't charge for the mastodon or chat portion of their Librem One subscription.
B) Isn't mastodon itself a fork GNU Social?
C) They do moderate and handle reports as I myself have been reported before (a report made in bad faith)
@terryenglish i think forks are perfectly healthy
i've maintained forks of projects before and i have a few more planned.
I don't think mastodon is a fork, but even if it were it's a separate project with its own features and use case from gnu social.
librem.one doesn't seem to me like a fork that adds very much like other instances i've seen.
In my experience whenever purism forks software it just changes some logos and then leaves it unmaintained and without security patches.
That being said, I know most servers defederated from librem.one due to the reports being removed. If they've changed that, then servers might lift the ban. Just email an admin and tell them that purism will actually handle reports now and they might federate with you again.
@pounce I will need to confirm. It's possible that they originally were going to moderate but then have since dropped doing it. It was probably close to two years ago since I was reported.