

You would at least have plausible deniability. The bigger issue is that a lot of the modding being done is by administrators and not by moderators. Some are. But some of the most egregious stuff is being done by administrators.
PR 101. If you want to be an official project supported by many and used by many. Don’t have your flagship deployment hard attached to a controversial subject. Which you should know damn well it is. Second don’t have it administered with a Vanguard mindset. It drives people off. Look I’d be happy to discuss failings and successes of different ml regimes as well as Western capitalist and Democratic socialists. Realistically that can’t be done on your instance. Typically any inkling of discussing failures gets outright denied and usually bans are applied.
Go ahead, Rebrand as lemmy.org. Go ahead and have ml communities. They can even be Echo Chambers still too. Even Lemmy.world has ml communities. The reason that I respect @MrKaplan@lemmy.world and the world team. And would happily donate to them if they needed it. Despite possibly not agreeing politically as an anarchist. Is there administration. It’s thoughtful, deliberative, and sparing. Not vanguardist and cliquish. And it’s no coincidence the administrative flaws are shared with political ideology flaws.
This is it. Right now. This is your golden moment. You’re the lead developer for one of the most popular software platforms on a rapidly growing Federated system. You’re blowing up. You’re trying to go bigger. It’s a position that is yours to lose. And it’s your right and duty to choose. Do you want to be a footnote, or do you want to be a whole chapter? Do you want to be a possible big mover and shaker in Foss? Or is it ml Club forever, and long live the vanguard?
Being inclusive is hard, tolerance is hard, that’s why both are so valued. Believe me I know, I’m not perfect. Any deployment that is going to be seen as a flagship should also strive for that if they want support from disparate groups. And that’s just how it is. There is no debate or discussion to have on the topic.





It was wrong when the West did it, and it’s wrong when China does it. And it’s wrong that it’s a fact that this statement is somehow controversial.