Dear Admins and Users of lemmy.world,

I am writing to express my concerns about the impact of lemmy.ml on our community. It has come to my attention that lemmy.ml frequently disseminates propaganda and engages in historical revisionism. Moreover, there have been instances where their admin privileges were used to suppress dissenting views, reminiscent of the already defederated lemmygrad instance.

While personal blocking of lemmy.ml is an option, it does not address the broader issue of new users potentially being influenced by misleading content. It is crucial that we protect our users from a continuous stream of biased information.

To illustrate these concerns, I have provided a link to a detailed post on the Fediverse that documents these issues comprehensively [Here].

Given these points, I urge the admins to consider a defederation from lemmy.ml. If their users wish to remain part of Lemmy.ml, that is entirely acceptable, but we should take steps to prevent the propagation of harmful misinformation, especially in their comment sections.

Thank you for your consideration.

  • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
    1713·
    24 days ago

    I think dissenting views is helpful in a community, even crazy psychotic and editorialized views.

    If instances defederate just because they have different viewpoints is going to get really lonely in the fediverse.

    A more generalized rules of cooperative federation would be a better solution then doing a case by case debate. I.e.

    • Instances we federate with must have a clearly defined moderation policy at the instance level

    • Any user banning at the instance level must follow the published moderation policy

    Just the basics.

    • Richard@lemmy.worldEnglish
      354·
      24 days ago

      It’s not so much that they have dissenting views, but rather that they throw the ban hammer around for anyone remotely suggesting that they have a really skewed perception of history and that they are actively disseminating propaganda and engaging in historical revisionism. The post that OP mentioned illustrates that very well, and those are things that have happened on .ml for months now.

      I agree about the instance level moderation policy, and I’d like for the LW team to take it up with the ML admins. But at the same time, we should seriously consider defederating in the case that they are unwilling to compromise.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        24 days ago

        This is why federation should have a standard that needs to be followed. Been saying that for a year now.

        Instance level administration/moderation has an effect on the democratic system that is the backbone of the entire federation. We can choose not to federate all their actions, but it still has an effect on instance A when something isn’t visible on instance B and instance B visitors can not not vote on it. It skews the outcomes for everyone.

        So there should be a standard for federated instances to administer and moderate fairly and honestly, in line with established and public rules.

    • Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.worldOP
      247·
      24 days ago

      It’s not that their views are diffrent they straight up lie. And if you call them out, you get banned from all communitys and silenced in any way possible.

    • Ibaudia@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      24 days ago

      They do not have a clearly defined moderation policy, they are flagrantly banning any dissenters to their political views from communities unrelated to the posts in question. Allowing them to grow more power in the space by keeping them federated with other large instances is a bad thing imo.