If I understand it right, the moderator of the mastodon.world instance has blocked several posts by Hasnain Kazim, as Kazim reported yesterday on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/661473263/posts/10163657720033264/
Kazim is a quite famous and successful book author in Germany and something between left, conservative and liberal. He was journalist for the most important German weekly news magazine Spiegel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasnain_Kazim?wprov=sfla1
Canceling his posts is stupid and certainly completely exaggerated. To me from the external perspective it seems that the moderator is abusing his power. He is damaging free and respectful discussion. Furthermore, when a famous person like Kazim reports those experiences to his broad audience, who do not understand the functioning of the fediverse, the moderator also damages Mastodon in general significantly, it seems to me.
What do you think about this case ?
If someone gets banned from an instance, they are free to move their account to a new instance and still keep their followers.
Someone doesn’t just get to break instance rules just because they are a successful author. Attitudes need to change, if you approach the fediverse like corporate social media, you are doing it wrong.
What’s his excuse going to be once he gets muted on bluesky?
Also, what does “banning” even mean? Lemmings I find love to abuse terminology so that a one-hour time-out period gets referred to as a “ban” (tbf this was inherited from Reddit, no matter how much we’d like to leave the old ways behind, they do tend to cling stubbornly).
But I don’t know how Mastodon uses those words - is he even truly “banned” or merely “banned” for like an hour while the moderator spent that time researching the situation?
The word ban does not imply any duration on its own.
Irl if you “ban” something, like cigarettes, then it does not necessarily imply forever but it does sorta imply until the law is changed i.e. until further notice.
So then if you ban a person for a period of one week, the timeline needs to be delivered alongside the word - “banned for a week”.
Which the OP did not do, and moreover (I am not sure if the post was edited or was always this way), seems to go out of its way to imply a permanent banning? Though the phrasing used was “cancels” rather than bans.
Well, perhaps it’s a language issue, but this OP is also quite sensationalistic, so my fault I suppose for engaging with what is clearly an emotional rant rather than a piece of any substance (again, regardless of whether the original subject is true or not, I am saying that this post does a poor job describing what occurred).