i mean, the people who have the time to sit there and nitpick the social justice awareness of source code… aren’t exactly going to be the most well-adjusted individuals.
As stated, most of the things here can be turned off
Is it possible to disable how user blocking works?
and one part specifically is a complete misrepresentation
If you’re talking about defederation, then no: it’s an updated version of the comment that properly explains how it works. To be honest, I think the correct interpretation is even worse: https://lemmy.ml/post/42415919/23664761
No more than an instance on Lemmy can make it so blocked a counts can’t reply to someone who blocked them. That’s just contradictory blocking philosophies at play.
The way that the defederation claim was originally made was that Piefed automatically blocks lemmy.ml, hexbear, and lemmygrad and automatically repopulates those instances as blocked if an instance owner wipes their defederation. This wasn’t true. And lemmy.ml has never been on the autoblocklist.
In my opinion, this blocking philosophy is hurtful to the Fediverse. To me it feels like EEE from the PieFed devs who clearly dislike the Lemmy devs.
The way that the defederation claim was originally made was that Piefed automatically blocks lemmy.ml, hexbear, and lemmygrad and automatically repopulates those instances as blocked if an instance owner wipes their defederation. This wasn’t true. And lemmy.ml has never been on the autoblocklist.
Yes, you’re correct! And the message I linked no longer includes this disinformation.
I don’t know why you think a different philosophy the blocking system from Piefed, regardless of what you think of its impact - has anything to do with any dislike of Lemmy devs.
See this comment with PieFed code analysis for context: https://lemmy.ml/post/42415919/23662293
Also featuring extra serving of drama slop
https://hexbear.net/post/7507322?scrollToComments=false
And on top of that looks like the guy who posted this meme: https://lemmy.ml/post/42415919
Got his account deleted on PieFed: https://lemmy.ml/post/42415919/23687401
Big cringe, not even hexbear admins do that.
deleted by creator
Hahaha, that’s what jumped out to me as well.
deleted by creator
i mean, the people who have the time to sit there and nitpick the social justice awareness of source code… aren’t exactly going to be the most well-adjusted individuals.
They also complained about a proper functioning block system lmfao
As stated, most of the things here can be turned off - and one part specifically is a complete misrepresentation.
Is it possible to disable how user blocking works?
If you’re talking about defederation, then no: it’s an updated version of the comment that properly explains how it works. To be honest, I think the correct interpretation is even worse: https://lemmy.ml/post/42415919/23664761
No more than an instance on Lemmy can make it so blocked a counts can’t reply to someone who blocked them. That’s just contradictory blocking philosophies at play.
The way that the defederation claim was originally made was that Piefed automatically blocks lemmy.ml, hexbear, and lemmygrad and automatically repopulates those instances as blocked if an instance owner wipes their defederation. This wasn’t true. And lemmy.ml has never been on the autoblocklist.
In my opinion, this blocking philosophy is hurtful to the Fediverse. To me it feels like EEE from the PieFed devs who clearly dislike the Lemmy devs.
Yes, you’re correct! And the message I linked no longer includes this disinformation.
I don’t know why you think a different philosophy the blocking system from Piefed, regardless of what you think of its impact - has anything to do with any dislike of Lemmy devs.
No, this particular feature is not related to a dislike of the Lemmy devs. I just wanted to say that I don’t like this feature.
But some of the features mentioned in the linked comment are related. Sorry if that wasn’t clear, I’m not a native speaker.
Only the automatic instance defederation.
Their way of doing it honestly makes more sense imo.
deleted by creator
Even if that’s the case (I don’t know the author), I don’t think it affects what he wrote in the linked post in any way.
Valid.