Recent searches
Search options
Made a post on Bluesky about moderation problems on Bluesky. Got this reply. My gut response is okay, weird offtopic reply. Then I thought about it and was like, wait, I don't know enough about the referenced philosophy to know if this makes sense, it might actually be relevant. Then I thought about it some more and was like wait, is it actually the case bluesky is fundamentally anarcholibertarian while Mastodon is fundamentally anarchosyndicalist…? Instances as reification of interest groups?
@mcc mastodon and the fediverse more broadly is extremely authoritarian imo. Instance admins are little dictators who get to control what information that "their" users see.
@ch0ccyra1n @mcc Except their users just move. Mastodon (rather the fedi) is a mix of all kinds of models that heavily incentivizes the shit ones dying out.
@ch0ccyra1n @mcc It's not a boot if they can't keep you under it. And it's not a dictator unless a single person or small group without a better governance model controls everything.
@dalias @mcc I consider any form of governance to be just dictatorship lite. But I can understand why one would disagree with such an assessment. I simply do not think it is right to have any sort of hierarchy and I think it is one of the biggest flaws with both centralized and federated models of social networking.
@ch0ccyra1n @mcc Governance does not have to be hierarchical.
@ch0ccyra1n @mcc Kinda real world example: a jury is empowered to make seriously decisions that are a form of governance, but they're not part of a hierarchical social relationship, and ideally chosen explicitly not to be.