Rimu recently started a new rant thread. I copied the response of the person they had targeted and in less than a minute Rimu had deleted the comment.
This is the comment Rimu did not want people being able to see: https://feddit.uk/post/53824748/26875911
This is the thread I shared it on: https://feddit.uk/post/53824747
I don’t see how people can still use piefed with someone like this in charge. A new red flag pops up every month. It’s hard to see them among all the other red flags.
good news, nobody who like Piefed has to use it. we’ve gotten PyLova to the point it’s running Quokk.au and Anarchist.Nexus, and we’ve not only removed the censorship and the bias, but we’ve also improved the UI, made some new themes, and most important of all patched some security vulnerabilities.
at this point it’s better than Piefed in every way.
Just curious, but why not use Lemmy instead?
there’s a lot of features that PyLova has that Lemmy does not.
What’s the differences between PyLova and Lemmy? Why use it over Lemmy?
PyLova has a lot more features than Lemmy does.
More features, faster updates.
There’s a number of negative things about the Lemmy devs as well. This isn’t a whataboutism, or deflection. One of the lead Lemmy devs account is named for a genocidal dictator. I will give them acknowledgment and props for not perpetuating larger systems of oppression through software. Instead choosing to gleefully micro manage their own fiefdoms by hand doing it.
Point being if you’re using the threadiverse, you’re not going to find a major backend that isn’t it developed by someone with a toxic relationship to power. And ultimately a tool is still a tool regardless of Who develops it.
Your comment is whataboutism and a deflection. Saying something isn’t what it is doesn’t make it any less is.
No my comment was strictly with regards to you calling out users of a particular software. When it comes to rimu. 100% ptb unfortunately. I can’t support the authors of Lemmy or piefed. But people are free to use whichever tools they choose in this instance. But good luck constructing that straw man.
This has got to be the worst use of “straw man” I have seen on lemmy so far. And I’ve seen some bad ones.
Just a tip, you can’t call every argument you don’t like a straw man. It has a meaning.
I dunno that the original dessalines counts as genocidal, despite his attempts to rid haiti of whites. It was more or less a mass murder, and outright unnecessary since he had other options, but I don’t know that genocide would be the right term for it? Maybe, I’m not fully convinced either way, just starting a tangent
That tangent is that the real dessalines was… complicated. He essentially became a central figure in Haitian liberation. One can argue that the revolution might not have succeeded without him. He was certainly effective.
He was also effective as “emperor” (in quotes because it’s hard to be an emperor of a single nation) for the most part. Made Haiti pitchy officially an independent nation, declared slavery abolished, stripped colonialists of property, and generally kept things running.
Of course, part of keeping things running was treating Haitians like slaves, just without the label.
Which shows both why the dev dessalines might have chosen the name, and why it doesn’t really fit. Plus, you know, the whole emperor thing being contrary to socialism being weird.
Fwiw to anyone here for the tangent, there’s been a goodly number of books about the real Dessalines. Likely available at your local library, or on the high seas. He was a fascinating figure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1804_Haitian_massacre first sentence.
A genocidal dictator? Do tell, which one? Hitler? Netanyahu? Bush??
Jean-Jacques Dessalines
Kinda weird that you don’t mention the whole former slave who led the resistance to abolish slavery and free his country thing.
Do you even know the history of Haiti and why it is globally relevant? You CANNOT divorce that from the context of this.
Yes. And if he hadn’t slaughtered his White allies. Or been so oppressive to his own people I would probably think he was a pretty decent guy. He wasn’t. Like people in general he was a complicated and morally problematic person. How was slaughtering his white allies winning freedom for him and his people? Or do you view it as impossible to do wrong in pursuit of revolution?
Okay so, since you didn’t quite understand it before:
That’s a strawman.