Nostr pubkey: npub1wamvxt2tr50ghu4fdw47ksadnt0p277nv0vfhplmv0n0z3243zyq26u3l2
some powerful Lemmy insider who’s scared of being exposed. “Lemmy insider who is scared of being exposed”
Why did you quote this part twice?
What are you on about?
This is always a weird question to ask in text-based discussions where you can just read stuff again, especially when the person you're responding to is just using the exact plain English words for simple and complete points.
Exposed for what?
False advertising, I guess? You tell me, you're the one that came up with the strategy.
What’s a “Lemmy insider”?
I have no guess for who you think is going to ban me for you. I think it's kinda hilarious (but more concerning) that you seem convinced there is some powerful Lemmy insider who would be worried about me exposing them with my posts about Tor integration or something.
I’ve never seen someone with such an outrageous persecution complex.
Seems like you're accusing me of having a persecution complex, which I don't. You might, though.
It’s genuinely comical.
Not sure what you mean.
You think you’re equivalent to a dissident in Iran because you’re getting blowback on a thread you made on a small forum online.
Again, not sure what you mean.
I think I’m done now really.
I hope so.
This is just utterly unhinged.
A professional might be able to help you.
I am reporting this for abuse, because it’s just insults for much of it.
Didn't ask.
It wasn't long though, it's weird that you didn't really refute it while it explained how you're clearly lying, and yet you keep upholding that you're "not a liar"
I said: “And in terms of instances, an instance owner can absolutely choose the theme of their instance.”
You replied: “Incorrect. Federation broken, which prevents this. How many times do I have to say this?”
I asked: “How does federation allegedly being broken mean that lemmy.blahaj can’t be an LGBTQ focused instance? How does federation allegedly being broken mean that slrpnk.net can’t be a solarpunk themed instance? Or that adult.swim isn’t themed around animation?”
I don't remember the adult.swim part at the time but why are you recapping the discussion instead of continuing it?
The point is that different instances have different local cultures, rules, themes etc. That’s my point.
I don't see how it's a point, and it's weird how you keep copying and pasting random quotes from me and then changing the subject without answering, while I copy and paste quotes from you and then my responses to them.
Yeah, about that, got any evidence of lemmy.world being run by glowies?
You keep asking this, like you can't figure out the answer for yourself. It's kind of amusing.
Your future imagined here would require all current active and used instances to become completely anti-censorship in the way you want.
No, my imagination is separate from yours. You imagining something and typing it for me to read doesn't make it my imagined future.
Which they won’t.
Didn't ask, don't care.
I’m not holding you captive, making you respond.
I didn't ask if you were. Why waste time typing that?
That it upsets you so much is an entirely self-inflicted problem.
I don't understand. How much do you mean? What problem? Whose self?
Here’s you first mentioning them.
First mentioning what, and why are you giving me a link to my own post?
You claimed I had forgotten the rules of any instance when no such event happened.
I don't think I claimed that. You were clearly pretending to forget, not actually forgetting. I made it clear that seemed pretty obvious from how you had just mentioned examples yourself, right before asking for them.
You are a sensitive little soul, aren’t you?
Me, the soul? I don't know. I'm pretty sure my sensitivity is powered by the central nervous system. There's not a clear scientific answer on what souls even are, but it feels like I might have a honey badger type of one, in the body of a human pothead.
I’m not keeping you here.
I didn't ask if you were.
You don’t have to reply.
I didn't ask if I did, and while it's debatable, I don't really have enough of an opinion to debate on it.
Okay, so you’re not making demands. So what now then?
Currently answering yet another dumb question you can't possibly have really needed to ask.
It’s not going to happen unless you do it yourself, or somehow convince Lemmy to change direction
Incorrect. Someone else could also do it themselves or "convince Lemmy to change direction" (i.e. pay a dev to do a fork or whatever you mean?)
(unlikely)
Incorrect. "Convincing Lemmy to change direction" (i.e. paying a dev to do a fork or whatever you mean) is the type of thing I kinda tend to do
I don’t care. Where’s your evidence?
If you don't care about my question, why are you asking one?
My point exactly.
Nope. You don't have one.
You barely know what you’re replying to.
Incorrect.
So, no, you can’t. You make claims and everyone has to disprove them.
Not sure what you're saying, but doesn't sound like it makes sense.
No, you referenced them suddenly as a site that was shut down.
Incorrect. You brought up the topic they were a subtopic in. Why do you keep repeating the same lies? Is there a reason other than that you're deeply mentally ill?
“Abusive”? Am I keeping you here?
Why do you keep acting like you need everything repeated so many times? Is there a reason other than that you're a pathologically abusive person?
What is it you thought I meant when I said “banned” exactly?
You keep asking me what I think you mean, as if I'm sitting here trying to guess what you mean.
I don't know. I don't even care about the answer anymore. I've repeatedly told you I will mainly respond to what your words mean instead of trying to guess your secret meanings.
The point was that you can’t, per the rules, share CSAM on here. You seemed to deny that.
That's not a point, and you seem to be implying I'm incorrectly denying what rules are here instead of correctly rejecting misuse of English (e.g. saying "can't" when meaning "shouldn't")
You seem to think that the fact that you can’t incite violence on the fediverse is somehow harmful and corrosive to public discourse.
This seems like another reply where you're trying to bait me to give you some kind of justification for banning me or removing my comments. I can't respond appropriately unless you try again on nostr.
Yes, it’s your words where you suggested the goal of the Fediverse was to outgrow reddit.
Incorrect. I don't have any words where I suggested the goal of the Fediverse was to outgrow reddit.
It's also probably not anything like that. Breaking it down into components, I try to remember not to say brand names like "Fediverse" have "goals" like people, and even though I mess that up sometimes, I also don't know if the people who run the "Fediverse brand name" want to outgrow reddit, so I don't think I'd say that.
You’ve repeatedly shown you don’t understand the basics of the purpose of the fediverse to most users here.
Incorrect. I haven't discussed it enough to do that. I barely know what the "fediverse" is at all. It's only been mentioned in this thread a few times, where I have been able to understand enough to give logical replies.
I think I'd end up being one of those "middle people" if I'm allowed.
What if the places that ban people end up banning the "middle people" - like, "starting today, anyone who posts in the other place is banned from posting in this one"
I fear people like me being wiped out, followed by more when we're not there to fight for the world
Thank you again for the sense of sincerity I get from your replies
then it’s misleading to use the word censorship i think, it’s more a mix of a lack of visibility and echo chambers
But the authorities cause it willingly, so it's censorship, imo. Maybe debatable
If i understood you correctly, could you expand on your solution ?
Another way of looking at the problem is, without Tor federation, all the federated instances will be 100% one group of people, and each Tor instance will be 100% another group
That 100% isn't healthy, there needs to be a balance where each place has some of each group. I don't want a place full of nothing but pedophiles, but I also don't want a place full of nothing but people who send pedophiles to their own place. I want a place full of nothing but people who agree everyone should be allowed to talk
You don’t even know most of the active lemmy instances.
Who asked if I did?
I find it unlikely that you have any evidence of any Lemmy instance having being shut down by the “authorities” ™
I didn't ask if you do.
It shows that we have a good idea what will happen without censorship.
How would it do that? How does it do that?
I don’t really give a fuck about your questions.
I didn't ask if you do.
It’s pathetic that it took so many posts for you to finally acknowledge this question.
How many?
Also, is there a way to tell if (or maybe when) a post here is edited, so you could prove your answer with numbered links?
What sort of comical Jordan Peterson style reply is this lmao
Neither comical nor Jordan Peterson style.
If I remember right you said "these rules" but it was a question, so it's acting like I somehow know what set of rules you mean when you didn't establish a group of rules to be talking about before calling it "these rules"
Lmao what evidence fucking hell
The lack of anyone else demonstrating the same level of fluency as me despite what seems like immense pressure to do so in the current state of the anglosphere / planet
So what do I mean when I say “Disprove a negative” then?
Hopefully the opposite of "proving a negative," i.e. to do the opposite of proving with the opposite of a positive, but you've shown it's not safe to assume you're using terminology correctly, so I have no fucking idea, and your use of the word "so" is weird here, like me knowing what words mean is supposed to mean I know what you mean by them when you keep using your own secret definitions of things. For all I know, you mean the common phrase "proving a negative" and you simply remembered it wrong.
I haven’t googled anything.
Maybe you should try it.
I’m awaiting evidence from you of a lemmy instance being shut down by the “authorities”.
Why? I didn't tell you to do that.
4chan and Twitter are less censored than Reddit, but even more garbage.
"Less censored" and "more garbage" are both heavily debatable, but why did you bring this up? What's the relevance?
I don’t see how that question baits you.
That's why I suggested you try asking on nostr, instead of here. It's hard to know the answers to questions you've asked in places the person you're asking knows it's not really possible to give an appropriate answer.
You keep replying. I obviously don’t need to give you anything here.
I didn't ask, but why did you put this right after a part where you ignored yet another question I asked? At least it was explicitly a rhetorical question this time, but still weird behavior to keep copying and pasting all the questions for no reason.
So as I said: Where’s your evidence of lemmy.world mods being glowies?
I'll half-answer this if you answer one of the many questions you've ignored from me.
Yes. You did claim that lemmy.world mods are glowies. Source
Why are you acting like I suddenly forgot this?
I’ll do whatever I like.
I didn't ask if you would.
You should stop putting your own statements in quote marks, it’s weird.
Name me these reasons for them being pressured.
What do you mean by "these?"
You think you’re the best living english speaker on the planet?
That's what the evidence suggests.
Who are “the authorities” here? The owners of instances? It’s not clear what you’re referring to.
Why are you asking again and acting like it isn't clear when I've answered this question in very clear wording multiple different ways for you already?
Why would “the authorities” (whatever that means) block IP addresses and domain names in the event of potential Lemmy growth?
Same reason they created FCC licenses, same reason they started taking subreddits away from reddit mods by force, etc.
War criminals would find it difficult to keep being granted authority by The People without seeding mental illness and shifting the overton window as far as possible from reality
What's not?
Also, yet again, it's weird how you copy and paste my questions, and then change the subject immediately without typing anything in between.
Obviously, if you're not offering any money, I can't think of any individuals I would subject to the risk of you harassing them. If you are offering any money, they would want the payment up front before I draw your attention to them and expose them to that risk, and you seem like a capitalist who's way too poor and distrustful to offer payment up front. It's hard to guess why you typed this, except that you do seem very obsessed with wasting time.
I think I said "act like," not "imply," if I remember right, and I didn't even say it happened without pointing clearly at exactly where, so where did you get me saying "imply" and not being clear about what I was talking about?
I didn't ask if you did.
I didn't ask if I do.
I didn't ask if it is. However, it's weird that you seem to think you can judge others for insulting you after you insult them repeatedly.