Criteria: I’m looking for instances that are defed’ with the Big 3 tankies (lemmygrad, lemmy.ml, and hexbear). I have no interest in trying to persuade my friends to create an acc and set up instance blocks before diving in, or dealing with the feedback when they run into the tankie brigade.
Edit: lemmy.cafe and infosec.pub seem to fit. I also find it really interesting just how many of the replies totally ignored my stated criteria.
I suppose it depends very much on what your definition of PTB is. Firstly, I’ll say this is based on the info in that post, and it may be one-sided since he didn’t defend himself.
The fact that he declares his intentions does help, but IMO it’s a large overstep. Banning anybody who so much as downvotes you is going to ensure you have an absolute echo chamber very soon. Which I’m guessing is probably the point, since otherwise he could have gone the Beehaw way of disabling downvotes for his instance.
Huh, I just checked the modlogs and yep, I’m banned from his instance. I suppose if you’re a user on his instance and unaware of what’s happening, you’ll just see the fediverse slowly shrink and shrink. I’m a reasonably prolific contributor, I’m fairly moderate, and if I’m getting banned for my views, so is a significant portion of the fediverse.
I agree with that. Comms should have full control over the type of content (including comments) they want appearing within them. But that’s not what’s happening with dubvee.
I agree with you that we need more content. I’ve blocked most of the meme comms b/c they’re not my thing, and most of the remaining content falls into a very few lonely groups. Building niche comms is a lot of work.
But that’s not what he did? This was mentioned in the post as well: he is banning on a pattern of voting, regardless of who it is to. The admin of midwest.social was banning people that downvoted HIM specifically, but dubvee.org seems to be doing this regardless of whether the votes are directed at him or someone else.
So like if a girl will only date boys taller than herself, that’s pretty shallow, but at least she’s up-front about her criteria?
So I think the avoidance of the PTB label is bc the walk matches the talk. So not quite a CLM as in button mashing, but closer to that one it would seem as in someone using the Lemmy tools to try to accomplish something that perhaps something other than Lemmy might have worked better at (not sure what) - so “an imperfect solution to the problem at hand” situation rather than PTB?