I know these federated communities exist as well as raddle, but it still seems like most people will stay on toxic and corporate-run platforms like reddit or Twitter. I’m far from perfect myself and I still use reddit sometimes, especially for more niche communities, but when it comes to ideologically strong communities like the anarchist ones, it just feels wrong that the majority still hang out on reddit. Or you know, moving to something like Bsky when Twitter became too toxic but which is still run by a large, for-profit corporation (if they moved in the first place). What are your thoughts? Is there any justification for this?

  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Hexbear can indeed be very offputting to anarchists, especially those who learned from history that “left unity” isn’t. It’s why slrpnk.net has outright blocked hexbear and they also managed to alienate all the admins of dbzer0. Likewise they get very little respect from anarchists in places like kolektiva.social.

    In fact, the only people I’ve seen who keep insisting there’s totally a lot of anarchists in hexbear is MLs in lemmy.ml and hexbear.

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        A kolektiva.social admin is raided and their hardware and data seized at which point they immediately announce that to everyone

        @[email protected] with the galaxy brain take: “Hurr durr, they gave their data away to the FBI. They’re a honeypot.”

        Always bad faith with these sockpuppets…

    • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Hexbear can indeed be very offputting to anarchists

      You should ask the anarchists on the hexbear anarchism comm. I’m sure they will share some reasonable criticisms but also explain something similar to my general sentiment.

      especially those who learned from history that “left unity” isn’t.

      Which decades or so?

      It’s why slrpnk.net has outright blocked hexbear

      slrpnk.net preemptively blocked hexbear by fiat of admins and without any kind of vote. A very, very funny thing for an “anarchist” instance to do, don’t you think?

      and they also managed to alienate all the admins of dbzer0

      So you mean yourself when you were acting like this? https://hexbear.net/post/2489084/4892908

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        You should ask the anarchists on the hexbear anarchism comm. I’m sure they will share some reasonable criticisms but also explain something similar to my general sentiment.

        They’re free to venture out and tell us. Or do you also claim they don’t come out of hexbear because the rest of us don’t accept “AES” and haven’t read enough Lenin?

        Which decades or so?

        Plenty of learning experiences throughout the last century.

        slrpnk.net preemptively blocked hexbear by fiat of admins and without any kind of vote. A very, very funny thing for an “anarchist” instance to do, don’t you think?

        Sure if you don’t understand anarchism and think one always have to make an affinity group instance. It’s also a very hypocritical argument when coming from MLs who routinely talk about giving “critical support”. I.e. they understand not everything can be perfect all the time, but when anarchists are not perfect, it’s a gotcha.

        So you mean yourself when you were acting like this? https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/19918886

        Like what? Use your own words, don’t just link to a thread full of bad faith takes. Cmon, you didn’t even link to the first de-federation thread.

        • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          They’re free to venture out and tell us. Or do you also claim they don’t come out of hexbear because the rest of us don’t accept “AES” and haven’t read enough Lenin?

          I made that recommendation before I realized you had been banned for harassing people. So I would recommend that anyone else follow my advice.

          Plenty of learning experiences throughout the last century.

          So the whole last 100 years? Or are there certain decades?

          Sure if you don’t understand anarchism and think one always have to make an affinity group instance.

          Voting on site-wide decisions does not require modeling an affinity group, it is not unique to an affinity group. Anarchists create collectives with participatory decision making of many kinds. What they rarely do is have a couple people make the major decisions on everyone’s behalf without others having a say.

          It’s also a very hypocritical argument when coming from MLs who routinely talk about giving “critical support”. I.e. they understand not everything can be perfect all the time, but when anarchists are not perfect, it’s a gotcall mere

          It’s a complete absurdity, not imperfection.

          Like what? Use your own words, don’t just link to a thread full of bad faith takes. Cmon, you didn’t even link to the first de-federation thread.

          You want me to repost screenshots of you harassing people? I’d rather not.

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            So the whole last 100 years? Or are there certain decades?

            The whole but of course a ton of hard lessons learned in the 20s and 30s

            Voting on site-wide decisions does not require modeling an affinity group, it is not unique to an affinity group. Anarchists create collectives with participatory decision making of many kinds. What they rarely do is have a couple people make the major decisions on everyone’s behalf without others having a say.

            Surprising concept I know but did it ever occur to you that slkpnk and dbzer0 is not just for anarchists? Maybe mull on that concept and what it means for instance-wide voting.

            there’s plenty of decisions that don’t need voting, even between anarchists. You don’t vote on each ban your> admins and mods take either. This is all just hypocritical gotchas again

            • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              4 days ago

              The whole but of course a ton of hard lessons learned in the 20s and 30s

              So the period I initially noted.

              Surprising concept I know but did it ever occur to you that slkpnk and dbzer0 is not just for anarchists?

              Describing those instances as anarchist was your doing from two of your comments ago: “Hexbear can indeed be very offputting to anarchists, especially those who learned from history that “left unity” isn’t. It’s why slrpnk.net has outright blocked hexbear and they also managed to alienate all the admins of dbzer0. Likewise they get very little respect from anarchists in places like kolektiva.social.”

              Now you’re just being inconsistent.

              there’s plenty of decisions that don’t need voting, even between anarchists. You don’t vote on each ban your> admins and mods take either. This is all just hypocritical gotchas again

              You probably should, given the above examples. Naturalistic fallacies don’t justify top-down fiats on major decisions.

              • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                4 days ago

                So the period I initially noted.

                Did you miss me saying “the whole” just before that?

                Now you’re just being inconsistent.

                OMG you are really deliberately obtuse. There’s anarchists on these instances but it’s not just anarchists. Cheezus crust!

                You probably should, given the above examples. Naturalistic fallacies don’t justify top-down fiats on major decisions.

                Sorry I’m too dumb, can please explain where I did a naturalistic fallacy?

                Anyway, it’s not a major decision to define what kind of instance one federates on init. I did as well when I defed lemmygrad and exploding heads. If done on start, people know what they’re joining. Again, a vote is not needed on everything and not everything is a “major decision” just because you claim it is.

                • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Did you miss me saying “the whole” just before that?

                  No, I am just pointing out that I had already correctly described this initially and we have now come full circle. You entered this conversation with a sense of correcting what I had said.

                  OMG you are really deliberately obtuse. There’s anarchists on these instances but it’s not just anarchists. Cheezus crust!

                  I am not being obtuse, you are being inconsistent. When it suits your criticism of what I said, you call those instances anarchist. When I say it is funny an anarchist instance has such an undemocratic process, suddenly you say it is wrong to call them anarchist.

                  Sorry I’m too dumb, can please explain where I did a naturalistic fallacy?

                  By arguing that existing practice justifies it as not going against basic anarchist principles. It is all very confused given the apparent superposition status of these instances as anarchist and not anarchist, of course.

                  Anyway, it’s not a major decision to define what kind of instance one federates on init.

                  It is, of course, a major decision. It is censorship.

                  I did as well when I defed lemmygrad and exploding heads. If done on start, people know what they’re joining.

                  Yes, that is true. If you establish bylaws of a collective first and then people join they consent to them, initially. But of course we aren’t talking about that at all.

                  Again, a vote is not needed on everything and not everything is a “major decision” just because you claim it is.

                  Of course nobody said everything needs a vote. This is just very silly straw manning.

                  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    No, I am just pointing out that I had already correctly described this initially and we have now come full circle. You entered this conversation with a sense of correcting what I had said.

                    I did correct what you said. The whole past 100 years have showed us lessons. Not just these dates. This is not hard to understand.

                    I am not being obtuse, you are being inconsistent. When it suits your criticism of what I said, you call those instances anarchist. When I say it is funny an anarchist instance has such an undemocratic process, suddenly you say it is wrong to call them anarchist.

                    The instances are anarchist because anarchists run them. They are not full of anarchists. An instance that is run by anarchists but open to others doesn’t always have to always require a voting by non-anarchists. There can be an internal affinity group handling this. There can be plenty of approaches to this, depending on the time and effort one can afford. Sure in a perfect world, everything would be done much more perfectly, but we do what we can with the time we have. If only you would request the same level of purity from the authoritarian regimes you support…

                    By arguing that existing practice justifies it as not going against basic anarchist principles. It is all very confused given the apparent superposition status of these instances as anarchist and not anarchist, of course.

                    How is that a naturalistic fallacy? Did I prescribe something as “good” or whatever because of we’re doing it already? No, I said that the current practice is consistent with anarchist principles. To argue the opposite you have to argue 2 things. 1 that setting some rules as soon as the instance opens (including defederated instances) is anti-anarchistic. And that 2. Anarchist running an instance deciding that some instances are too toxic to federate with is a “major decision” that always requires voting.

                    Yes, that is true. If you establish bylaws of a collective first and then people join they consent to them, initially. But of course we aren’t talking about that at all.

                    That’s exactly what we’re talking about! Just because we don’t do it in your approved manner doesn’t mean this isn’t exactly what we did.

                    Of course nobody said everything needs a vote. This is just very silly straw manning.

                    “And not everything is a major decision”, just ignore half of what I said, whydontcha.

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            I Didn’t harass anyone, but I know that’s what hexbears love to claim. Do feel free to post any evidence of me “harassing people”. We’ve been over this before. Calling a power tripping mod a pos isn’t “harassment” and y’all are cheapening the word to win internet arguments.

              • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                I don’t demand or request. I am just stating, as I’ve done many times before, that I didn’t harass anyone and there’s no “evidence” out there proving otherwise. All there is, as usual, is hexbears diluting the meaning of the word “harassment” to character assassinate those they collectively dislike.

                • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  You did, of course, repeatedly throw abuse, and it was entirely in line with the instance rules to then ban you.

                  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 days ago

                    No I didn’t “repeatedly throw abuse”. I don’t care about being banned. But I do care about the disinfo you’re spreading. I called them PoS once after being constantly goaded by them and their communities and banned based on a hypocritical reason which is one of my triggers, and them simply replied to the insults and goading thrown at me further in PMs.