Just a side note - I would caution about directing non-Black folks to spaces like # BlackMastodon and @ blackfedi, just because those spaces might not be intentioned for non-Black people to look at, directing us there might be encouraging our participation in spaces where it’s not necessarily invited or wanted, etc. Great spaces to direct Black folks to if they’re looking to build a community for themselves on fedi, but I would just say it’s best for non-Black people to not look/participate unless the space is specifically inviting that.

The other thing about the “just listen more to more Black people” discourse is that while it may fix representational issues of whom you’re choosing to listen to, it won’t help if there’s no intention to work on racial biases or challenge one’s own racist behaviors - so I would even implore that type of introspective work. Connected to that would be, even if a white person starts doing these things and working on this practice, that work of interrogating your own biases/behaviors never stops. I feel that white people (especially on fedi) often need reminding that just because you’re doing X, Y, Z, etc. doesn’t mean that you’re done working on your own racism or that your reasons for doing X, Y, Z, etc. are all genuine.

You might also want to mention how having some marginalized identity even as a white person doesn’t excuse you from doing this work - there’s a lot of harm done on fedi by people who use their own oppressed identities as a way to avert accountability for being racist. In your piece, you already mentioned that supporting Black people and fighting anti-Blackness means supporting all Black people - you could make that understanding of how anti-Blackness is interconnected/intertwined with other oppressions more apparent by appealing to white people who might consider themselves staunch advocates for other communities but refuse to confront racism.

This is kind of a mess of different comments but those are just my raw thoughts after reading what you wrote.

There is no should or shouldn’t, they’ve always had and been entitled to that choice. People who develop and host those platforms can make whatever choice they want.

ActivityPub/the Fediverse is only a protocol. If you philosophically disagree with how a platform makes use of that protocol, then you can (theoretically) just use another platform.

Respectfully, how on earth did this design get cleared? 😭

I’m surprised to hear that anyone would complain about this with C. Even the Wikipedia page about encapsulation cites C as a non-OOP language example.

Ok lol.

This is pretty much the position we took when clearing that comment thread — I didn’t scrutinize between ideologies, I removed a variety of comments just for not being nice or for being potentially inciting/inflammatory. I had to remove several comments in that thread by liberals as well for being unproductive or even toxic.

Only nit I have about your comment is that “sanitized space” is a term we came up with for the mod philosophy. We explicitly meant it in the context of removing “not nice” comments. It expresses the fact that we can’t perfectly clear the space of anything which an individual user might find offensive or harmful. The standards for gauging safety/harm in a space vary from user to user; our moderation has to consider our users collectively rather than just one of them. This is part of why Beehaw is not a sanitized space and aims, rather, to be what one might describe as a safe space, a brave space, an accountable space, or other similar term.

Really just putting this out there for the benefit of others, as it seems some are mistaken about the word “sanitized” and what we really meant by it.

Not to mention that thread about Affirmative Action, in which the comments seemed to espouse a purely Black point of view, not taking into account how it may have a positive effect on Asian admissions, and completely ignoring the discussion of how admissions should be merit-based no matter what

Honestly, there was no shortage of people arguing the type of position you’re discussing, but if you see a lack of it, you’re more than welcome to post/comment.

I don’t have high hopes for any sort of meaningful discussion happening here.

Then have discussion elsewhere, nobody is forcing you to post or participate here. You already said yourself that you have an account on another instance because you feel that way. There’s no need to come here and wax poetic about how you don’t see any “real discussion” happening, and doing so isn’t going to dramatically alter moderation policy. If you disagree with a discussion, again, feel free to post or comment. If you don’t think any real discussion will come of that or you disagree with moderation policy, you’re welcome to find community elsewhere.

As an aside:

Asian students […] historically place a much higher importance on education than the rest of the world

This isn’t really historical so much as it is stereotyping. Asian people aren’t a monolith. We don’t all align culturally, and we don’t all have the same attitudes. We aren’t all treated the same as other Asian people, nor do people in Asian diasporas all have the same socioeconomic outcomes.

Yeah, it’s generally the etiquette/rule on any of our news subhives to post archive links alongside any link. I appreciate this also because I feel like good journalism should rarely if ever be behind a paywall. Hopefully people on other subhives and other Lemmy instances will do the same. :)

It seems like it’s implying that the real problem is that people are too sensitive / too easily offended and not the person initiating the harmful content.

“Safe space” as a term comes from particular considerations about marginalized, especially LGBTQ+, people inhabiting academic space. The use of “safe” isn’t necessarily about the participants’ sensitivities so much as it’s in reference to a facilitator’s (such as a teacher) trustworthiness. As a queer person, can I come out to the person facilitating this space (and, possibly, to the others in this space) without fear of identity-based psychological/emotional or physical harm/violence? And can I trust that this facilitator will respect my identity and not harm me in any way?

“Sanitized space” — well, that isn’t really a term which comes from anywhere. We created it as a convenience for drawing comparison between other types of space.

Of course, the “paradox of tolerance” is something many of us are well acquainted with, and I think it’s always relevant when talking about bigotry. A space can’t be safe, sanitized, brave, accountable, tolerant, etc. unless we, as a rule, do not tolerate bigotry.

The problem with a “tolerant space” is that simple tolerance (with respect to identity) can imply some level of disagreeableness. Many people, especially queer people and people of color, don’t want to just be tolerated, as this can convey that our identities are something to be ‘put up with’ or ‘endured’ by others, when it should be bigotry that is the actual burden. In this case, what I personally want is acceptance and affirmation — to have my identity accepted, to have difference be welcomed, and to be affirmed in my experiences (especially with discrimination and bigotry).

Of course, you could say that leaving certain harmful content up makes a platform less tolerant, but as was raised in our philosophy article, what is the bar for harmful? Many of those who wrote this post, including myself, are frequent targets for bigotry, but our personal standards for ‘harmful’ aren’t universally applicable. Plus, it’s a lot harder to gauge the harm of long-form posts/comments than to moderate, say, messages in a chatroom.

The other aspect of this is: I hate having to wait on moderators and admins to take action, and I don’t want to put all the onus/responsibility for shaping the space on them. It’s glaring to me if other users don’t say or do anything about it and just leave it alone. A moderator can remove the content and ban the offending person, but it doesn’t get rid of the sour taste in my mouth that the others alongside me saw no need to do anything, which raises questions for me of their trustworthiness in handling other, more unclear instances of bigotry or more subtle prejudice.

I’ve been in spaces before which were highly vigilant in removing bigots and their speech, but even without them, what about the attitudes of others in the space? If they don’t take the right tone or approach to bigotry before the mod acts, it’s harder to trust them to listen when one of them does something less obviously harmful.

You may personally have not seen anything harmful on here, but I have seen stuff I would consider outright or subtly harmful, some of it directed at people like me. Honestly, I feel more assured when I can see that others have shown strong resistance to that kind of speech, which is what I’m really looking for to determine if a space is safe for me. Whether the content itself gets removed after that fact becomes of less consequence to me.

I’m personally more a fan of building an “accountable space”:

Accountability means being responsible for yourself, your intentions, words, and actions. It means entering a space with good intentions, but understanding that aligning your intent with action is the true test of commitment.

Accountable space guidelines allow for allies and marginalized communities to agree on a set of actionable behaviours/actions during the discussion to show allyship in real-time and after the event. It allows participants to align their well-meaning intentions with impact through a collective set of guidelines.

Accountable space guidelines do not place an unfair burden of bravery. They do not create mythical promises of safety and unicorns. They place an equal amount of onus for all to behave equitably and inclusively, to foster a deeper understanding of diverse lived experiences in real-time. (source)

With the Fediverse, you can have your biological and technological distinctiveness and eat it too! Perfection for everyone.

The article linked isn’t up to par with submission guidelines for !news. That’s the thing - it’s just an interview with a CEO, which on its own doesn’t really constitute news. Having taken a look at the link myself, there’s nothing but praises for crypto and not a lot of analysis. Even beyond the fact that it doesn’t hit the bar for being news, it reads like a straight-up propaganda piece. It doesn’t matter whether it’s your own opinion or someone else’s - the link isn’t news.

Practically everything what someone says is an opinion, so I feel with such a reason you could remove almost everything in News.

Per the !news guidelines, mods make the call on what’s remove-worthy:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

If our standards for removal aren’t up to your liking, you’re welcome to give feedback on them. But bear in mind that we have thousands of other users with different standards as well. Your personal standards may not map well to moderating the broader community.

Hey, although it’s no big deal since this is also about Lemmy, there’s a megathread for all Reddit-related news and discussion here. We’ve been encouraging everyone to direct most discussion related to Reddit there, and I figured it might be worthwhile to pose this question there since it concerns a former 3PA for Reddit. Thanks!

As a reminder, there’s a megathread about all Reddit-related news here - please direct all discussion about Reddit there. Thanks!

Go to your settings, then beside “Display name”, you can put in a nickname (or just your username) and then add your pronouns at the end.

I also like to put a link to a pronouns website like https://pronouns.page/ or https://pronouns.org/ in my bio, but that’s optional.

Thank you for the awesome shiny charts, Lion 🥹❤️

Also thanks to everyone who filled out the survey, it’s great to know who’s around and to see that most Beeple seem to be having a good time!

I figured it was only a matter of time before Unity made AI tools of their own - not too long ago, people in r/Unity were showcasing their own AI projects for building 3D scenes and UI. I wonder what this means for those projects.

I’m more partial to using Godot to develop games though, so I’m more interested in seeing how AI shows up on that front.

I recommend checking out fasterthanlime’s “A half-hour to learn Rust” if you want a brief breakdown of Rust syntax and key features, in addition to The Book and Rust by Example.

I personally disagree with the sentiment that going child-free is the solution to ecological catastrophe. Any individual’s decision to have children, or not, hardly compares to the systemic issues within agriculture and natural resource management which are causing it.

I thought beehaw was supposed to be the “nice” instance. You and others have done a wonderful job proving that otherwise today.

Well, the original comment in this thread which upset you came from your own instance. From where I’m sitting, that comment has been pretty much the only not-really-nice interaction you’ve had all day on here. Don’t really see where this strawman is coming from.

Could you add the link to your post?

I’m looking forward to the UI changes also, as well as the switch to the HTTP API, but I’m really even more stoked about 0.18.1 (especially the CAPTCHA being redone) - which I feel like would be a better time to upgrade.

That said, it just came out today (like a half hour ago), so the admins will probably want to wait for stability’s sake.