Why is blocking/suspending social.tchncs.de a controversial idea?

Unclear why it's even a topic of discussion.

I would like to see more instances follow the path of awoo.space, raising the ethical standard ever higher, and expanding it to become the new norm, to which all mainstream instances must conform.

Anything less is a ruinous compromise.

@HerraBRE would you consider moving to a safe instance so I can follow you from Awoo? (this is a cue for discussion)

Thanks for the invite, @fallerOfFalls!

I've given it considerable thought, and I think the answer is no. I would not move to a safe instance. I might come hang out, but I would not move.

If you'll forgive the cliché, I believe in "being the change you want to see in this world."

The change I want to see is people everywhere behaving respectfully and kindly - not polarization where all the "nice people" are in one place and all the "undesirables" somewhere else.

@HerraBRE I thought you might say that :)

There's an interesting parallel here with Mailpile's license choice https://www.mailpile.is/blog/2015-07-02_Licensing_Decision.html

AGPL is polarising. A line in the sand is polarising. Awoo is polarising.

@fallerOfFalls The targets are very different.

With the AGPLv3, I am largely excluding corporations with specific business models, and some (IMO misguided) zealots who prioritise developer freedoms over end-user freedoms. I'm OK with that.

Safe-space instances are excluding people, not just for bad behaviour, but also for who they associate with.

That may be justified in small doses for specific communities, but it IMO would be wrong to run everything that way.

@HerraBRE I wonder if there is (or could be) a way for safe-space instances to block content boosted from certain instances, while still federating with instances that federate with the blocked instance?

I'm assuming that the reason for requiring others to not federate with undesirables, is to prevent content from undesirables from being seen on awoo. In which case, it's really just a work around for a technical problem, though I can't find an issue for it???

@fallerOfFalls I also think you're being a tiny bit naive when you say it's just a workaround for a technical issue.

It is very clear that some people want to use blocks as a way to pressure instances into policing their communities in particular ways. The technicalities are, in part, an excuse for power games.

Some of those may be easily justified and for honourable reasons, but that's still what they are. 😱

@bob @fallerOfFalls @HerraBRE So ignoring for the minute the fact that you can block them what's to stop someone setting up their own instance and harassing others? You can't kick them off their own instance and as has been pointed out the whole system is federated, how do you exclude them from the federation?

What constitutes harassment anyway? Continually belittling someone? Personal insults? Name calling?
More: https://pastebin.com/882k0sQp

@pettter @lnxw48a1
*I can only answer for myself*

While I suspect lots would find your second example highly offensive I would have to say that while I disagree with that statement I would die defending your right to say it. Without freedom of speech Totalitarianism and censure creeps in.

@pettter @lnxw48a1 What I mean is you will end up with a small group who will meet out justice to users for the most pathetic of reasons or for reasons of cronyism.

While I agree bullying ect. needs to be stamped out I cannot fathom why supposed victims don't block their so called tormentors? It's not rocket science.

@pettter @dick_turpin @lnxw48a1

Premise: "if blocked, harassers will create new accounts to continue harassing"

Then it would make sense to block as the first test in determining whether something is harassment, vs argument or misunderstanding.

If a block ends the interaction, then it seems to me it probably wasn't harassment.

I think the idea that every interaction that goes south is abuse might become a self fulfilling prophecy.