sh.itjust.works Main Community

7705 readers

29 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

TheDude@sh.itjust.works

manifex@sh.itjust.works

biela@sh.itjust.works

imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works

De-federate from instances with loli (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 year ago by InfiniteVariables@sh.itjust.works to c/main@sh.itjust.works

130 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Can we get a consensus on whether our community should de-federate with servers that host loli? I personally think we should block them, and if that ends up not being the consensus here then I'll probably sign up on another server. I hope we can all agree to set that boundary though because I like it here and it seems otherwise pretty cool.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Velkas@lemmy.cock.social 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why not just leave it up to users on user by user basis? Are we already trying to regulate stuff on this platform? Block stuff if you don't like it, ignore if not. I'm by no means for loli personally, but that's going to start a snowball of overstepping and pretty soon it'll be like R where everything is locked, deleted, blocked, or hidden.

If it's not illegal, ignore it.

[–] amminadabz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The "slippery slope" argument is a logical fallacy.

[–] lich_hegemon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Disregarding an argument because it contains a fallacy is a fallacy too.

We've seen this happen on Reddit and I've seen it happen in multiple subs. The comment might have been alarmist but given past examples it's not unfounded.

[–] amminadabz@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Tu quoque is a fallacy. Pointing out fallacies isn't, I checked.

I cant say that defederating is the right or wrong move, I'm just tired of bad faith argument. There is a balance to be stricken between regulation and libertarianism, the question to be answered is where that balance lies. Disavowing any new regulation as an inevitable descent into complete loss of freedom is ridiculous.

[–] lich_hegemon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't disagree with your stance. I just want to point out that the fallacy exists. It's called the "Fallacy fallacy" or "Argument from fallacy"

[–] amminadabz@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well shit, I stand corrected. Props to you. /gen

[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Not appearing on a list with a Latin name doesn't mean something isn't a fallacy either. They're inventing all sorts of new and exciting ways to be wrong lately.