Hmmm, I honestly thought this was going to explore the topic of people that are in the closet about their gender identity. Or maybe, plural people. I find this video more confusing than anything.

I think the way you describe it is perhaps too abstract for me to understand the points you’re making.

I find this passage rather distressing however “Pronouns reference the framework you expect someone to use to process your words”. I find that language scary sounding. It feels like specifying someone’s pronouns is forcing an ideology or status on someone and I just don’t think that’s true at all.

I also don’t think saying gender has “dedicated pronouns” is really accurate. Neopronouns exist and they still confer meaning to the person so I don’t think it’s a defined set. Different languages also have different pronoun systems which complicate creating a specific set.

I find the third argument kind of odd. I think that displaying pronouns in general has the same effect you’re describing without the need for different pronouns in different spaces. The same thing is true for things like a role bot or other tools to allow people to display their pronouns.

Unsurprisingly, coming back on an alt to call moderators incompetent is going to be reason for a ban.

If you want to actually discuss a ban, use [email protected] with your account name.

This will be your only warning. Do not make bad faith comments like this. It’s entirely fine to bring new information and to correct people, it is not okay to insult people like this.

What I find infuriating is that this same meme also happened at the provincial level in Quebec in 2018.

I mean, even if you’re a labour fan, I can’t imagine needing to do a coalition with the liberal democrats and greens would hurt. That said, I don’t know much about UK politics.

Taiwan is not recognized by most countries.

Because of the Chinese Civil War (which technically never ended), both the government of Taiwan (under the name “Republic of China”) and Beijing (under the name “People’s Republic of China” claim to be the ‘real China’. At some point in time, most people recognized the Republic of China as the legitimate government of China, however, as the situation stagnated and the relevance of China became more important, most countries now recognize the People’s Republic of China as the legitimate government of China.

As for the NATO question - no, no such rule exists and nobody would want such a rule because it is a defence pact.

The answer is yes.

I’ve spent a lot of time trying to evangelize Lemmy on reddit, and one of the most common criticisms is the possibility of defederation and getting cut off from major communities.

Frankly, if this is a concern to people and I believe it does concern some, they should not use federated platforms as this will always happen.

We know that Lemmy slowly bled tens of thousands of users in the months following the reddit API exodus as users drifted back to reddit. Although it’s impossible to know how many of those users were annoyed by the defederation drama, I think it’s safe to say that the number wasn’t zero.

The steep decline in active users on Beehaw in the months following the decision is probably the best source of hard evidence supporting my claim.

You’re saying that the decline in active users on Beehaw is a result of these defederations while simultaneously acknowledging that Lemmy as a whole lost users. Maybe it is true, maybe it is not. I could not make such a claim with this information.

Do keep in mind that 11.6% of people chose to not answer that question so this 75% is not a very accurate metric. Not only that but ~35% of people declared to not come from the United States. I will also mention that our goal is not to reach an average that is close to a country’s demographics - we expect a bigger than average amount of people to be from a minorised group.

We could, that was something I had personally looked at but it is quite a bit of effort for nothing if there is no big split.

It would be possible to keep up with Lemmy’s API changes though it would certainly help if Lemmy’s API was actually versioned.

My personal opinion on this is that we should probably take an allowlist approach to federation to be able to be more proactive about instances that could be threats for Beehaw.

I think we’ve managed to keep our culture to some degree through stronger moderation when it comes to out-of-instance users and making use of defederations.

That said, I wish we had more flexible federation options, such as for example, letting our users interact with certain instances without letting people from those instances interact in ours.

Yeah… seems like a baserow bug. It renders fine on Firefox mobile. Not sure if it’d work in Desktop mode in Chromium browsers - worth a try for those with this issue.

The DMA (Digital Markets Act) has clauses that force big companies that are considered “gatekeepers” to allow interoperability with other services.

Images aren’t federated through ActivityPub so I don’t really see how deleting media is supposed to work.

Yes, they are. Every instance downloads everyone’s images for a “cached” version that is currently never used. This is what makes this problem especially insidious and straight up dangerous in cases like CSAM.

It’s a basic curl command, that shouldn’t be “arcane” if you’re setting up a server.

This is the equivalent of saying that any instance admin needs to know how to use curl while most people have never used a commandline. Not only that but you need machine access to know the api key which I would wager instance admins do not necessarily have.

I think this is the result of not prioritising work that makes moderation possible by non-technically inclined people and it is genuinely a failure of the system.

The priorities of development on Lemmy are decided by developers and the people who are not are simply pushed away. Most community leaders and moderators are not developers. The mental gymnastics to justify this lack of tooling is tiring.

They can, if they read the manual. Mods can’t, but instance admins can.

Yes. If you use arcane commands using the docs that are in a pull request that is not yet merged. This is not accessible to many instance admins and it is only “technically supported” which is the worst kind of support from my point of view.

Yeah, it’s just a room with toilet and sink that can be locked from the inside.

I’m sure it’s hard but the administration has made plans for new bathrooms and repeatedly made the same mistakes. In the new developments, the bathroom stalls with the infrastructure to accommodate people are always in men and women’s bathrooms so there is now actually no places for people that conform to neither.

It should be noted that I am just a man who does not use these bathrooms but I have some thoughts. My first impressions were from a queer perspective.

We have a pretty similar setup at school. It certainly doesn’t feel great to me. It always felt like a shortcut used by administration to answer the ‘inclusive bathroom issue’. It creates a weird fear in my mind of using one while I could be using another but instead I’d be blocking someone who needs the special infrastructure in the toilet. One of them has also repeatedly been locked by the administration because “people have sex in them” which just irks me so much. They would never close any other bathrooms if that happened in them - which it most certainly does.

Okay, that became a rant but um, these are my thoughts.