Well its kinda true to their instance, being full on anarcho.
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)
[CLOSED] FediLore + Fedidrama
3174 readers
2 users here now
This community has been locked, please see the discussion here. The original sidebar contents can be found below:
***
# Rules
1. Any drama must be posted as an observer, you cannot post drama that you are involved with.
2. When posting screenshots of drama, you must obscure the identity of all the participants.
3. The poster must have a credible post and comment history before submitting a piece of history. This is to avoid sock-puppetry and witch hunts.
The usual instance-wide rules also apply.
***
Chronicle the life and tale of the fediverse (+ matrix)
Largely a sublemmy about capturing drama, from fediverse spanning drama to just lemmy drama.
Includes lore like how a instance got it's name, how an instance got defederated, how an admin got doxxed, fedihistory etc
(New) This sub's intentions is to an archive/newspaper, as in preferably don't get into fights with each other or the ppl featured in the drama
Tags: fediverse news, lemmy news, lemmyverse
Partners:
* [midwest.social/c/Fediverse](https://midwest.social/c/fediverse)
* [Sub promo](https://lemmy.ca/c/communitypromo)
* [Fedizens](https://lemmy.ca/c/fedizens)
The original community icon is here
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
We at least want Lemmy to not get the same fate Tiktok almost did, right?
Every instance is free to operate how they please (sort of). That is the entire point of this project. Lemmy is not one site with one set of rules. It’s a lot of different instances, and within them communities, with their own rules. Respect them or leave, don’t complain because you want to hang around an instance but don’t want to follow their rules. You are stirring up trouble for no reason. You are being disrespectful of their community, so you are not welcome.
Beehaw rigorously protects LGBT people. They will ban you for being homophobic. Other instances won’t. Should we tell Beehaw they can’t do that? Or is their first responsibility to the community and the expectations they have set for them?
Beehaw rigorously protects LGBT people.
Blahaj?
Ah yes thank you. Though I think Beehaw does to a good degree as well.
Oh yes, indeed
lol pretty funny way to match my tone. I don’t know if it was intentional but I enjoyed it
Not really ha ha
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
We at least want Lemmy to not get the same fate Tiktok almost did, right?
what fate? The one that was just a stupid stunt by Trump? Literally can't be happening on the fediverse as the instances are distributed across the whole world.
And you don't think Trump would apply a stunt like that to the fediverse? He currently has a program where the government vets immigrants for their social media posts when they sign up for American citizenship. I would dare pray someone moving to America who has a Lemmy profile doesn't get found out as a lemming.
load more comments
(2 replies)
How? Lemmy is federated. If tiktok was banned, tiktok was "banned." If dbzer0 is banned, .world and .wtf still work.
Without knowing the context of those bans, it's kinda hard to say whether your take of them being "simply for believing in the concept of copyright" is actually anywhere close to reality or not.
Based on past experience of people posting hyperbolic claims about "instance X banning people for Y", it's never actually about Y.
So all those times people in Fedilore said "so-and-so was banned for so-and-so reason", it was premature to say so?
Depends on the amount of hyperbole, and getting banned for "believing in the concept of copyright" definitely smells like hyperbole.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Like redditors getting banned from dozens of communities for “literally no reason.”
load more comments
(2 replies)
~~DBZer0~~ Two communities in dBZer0 have begun banning people simply for ~~believing in~~ posting apologia for the concept of copyright.
Which, without further context, is still a bit of an overreach IMO, but nowhere near as extreme as your title suggests.
That's like banning people for following the law. That is banning people for following the law.
Lol fuck the law. I wipe my ass with the law. Banning people for following the law is turbo-based when the law is turbo garbage. Again, I don't think that simply apologizing for copyright warrants a ban without further context, but "I was banned for following the law" is a terrible argument and I had to speak out about it.
Are we forgetting a large portion of the fediverse's demographics consist of artists trying to make a damn living?
I was a music producer before going into engineering and I've always been against copyright lol. Copyright is a terrible minefield for doing work in my craft.
The law can take down the fediverse. Well, suit yourself then.
Also not sure how one can do apologia without believing in what they're saying.
Also not sure how one can do apologia without believing in what they're saying.
...you can just lie to people... like trolls...
But even if we assume for charitability's sake that apologia ==> believing in the cause, that does not automatically mean that apologia <== believing in the cause. Like they're not being banned for your beliefs. That user was banned for advocating for them. Which again, without context is still an overreach IMO, but this is absolutely not someone being banned for simply having the wrong opinion.
load more comments
(4 replies)
No, the law can take down dbzer0 and you are pretending to give a shit about that when you’re just upset that you can’t wipe your dirty shoes on their couch aka not follow their rules. They don’t want to debate copyright with you. Get over it
load more comments
(3 replies)
You were against copyright? the thing that got you paid and prevented me from just ripping your stuff for free lol
Yes, I always was and I am against copyright, full stop. Copyright makes it harder for people to share my music, which is why I gave it away. I was working in music for the music, but the little money I did make was from producing for others. The only reason I'm not posting it here is because I don't want to dox myself.
IMO the most important sources of income for musicians are live performances and *merch". This is also what we were taught in recording school. I barely got paid for my digital downloads, although I did get a few people paying even when I released it for free.
I would unironically be thrilled to find out someone pirated my shit. At least then someone thought it was important enough to steal.
And also I'm on Bandcamp. It's super easy to just rip my stuff. It's not as if copyright was protecting me from anything 😆.
well of course you dont care, your music apparently has no monetary value (which is fine, but why would you care about copyright when your music makes no money?)
No monetary value? Check this trick out:
If their music was commercially available, I'd pay double of what the most popular music is sold for on commercial platforms.
but why would you care about copyright when your music makes no money?
Because it makes sampling extremely legally treacherous.
your music apparently has no monetary value
Almost correct. Strictly speaking, people have paid for my music. Also...last time I checked, Bandcamp had a policy where I was only allowed to offer a limited amount of free downloads and then I would have to pay them to offer my work for free. So I think it is behind the minimum paywall right now, which means it has nonzero monetary value. Which makes me a hypocrite. Shock-horror. But more than a hypocrite... I've just been too busy to check on my Bandcamp account since I went back to school. If anyone knows of a free and federated alternative to Bandcamp, please let me know.
Music, like all art and information, should be free for anyone to use and consume. Simultaneously, musicians should be compensated for their work, and I provided other ways that musicians are currently compensated for their work (merch and live shows) in the current system. Frankly , these are much more robust ways to make money.
But more accurately, everyone should have access to the resources they need to survive by virtue of being human, regardless of their success in their chosen field. Full stop.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Copyright is more than just about the distribution. Copyright laws...
- Encourage credit to be given, when people often otherwise not give credit
- Prevent people from making money from something that is given away for free
- Prevent people from making fake versions of a book, like what happened to the fifth Harry Potter book
- Through all of this maintain incentive for artists to make art
- Encourage credit to be given, when people often otherwise not give credit
Even with copyright, musicians steal parts from each other all the time. Same with other art forms. Taking small parts of other people's art is normal and how art gets created. And there are social consequences even under capitalism to stealing an entire work without credit which are less formal than legal ones, but just as important for artists looking to keep doing art.
- Prevent people from making money from something that is given away for free
... this is not necessarily a bad thing. For example, I would happily buy a copy of Mutual Aid by Kropotkin even if Kropotkin or his descendants don't get compensated because someone put in the work to print the book.
- Prevent people from making fake versions of a book, like what happened to the fifth Harry Potter book
Again, there are social and legal consequences even under capitalism for selling people things under false pretenses.
- Through all of this maintain incentive for artists to make art
I 1000% do not want to consume art created primarily for profit. Profit-driven art is soulless corpo-trash. It takes up air that could be used by serious organic artists. Driving out profit-seeking behavior is strictly positive IMO. I want to drive out profit-seeking behavior everywhere forever, but art is a great place to start.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I counted way more than two communities.
In case people missed it (I will assume good faith here), "anti-AI troll" is another way of saying "this person is concerned about copyright".
"anti-AI troll" is another way of saying "this person is concerned about copyright"
...are you sure about that? There are lots of arguments against AI that aren't related to copyright, e.g. displacement of workers and environmental impacts. Considering that those forums are explicitly a place to appreciate AI content, I imagine it would be quite annoying to relitigate that issue in their home turf. So if the mods wanted to call out copyright, why not just do so explicitly?
load more comments
(1 replies)
You can believe in whatever you want in other comms, that have different policy. Nothing will happen with fediverse if you won't or will support copyright.
load more comments
(3 replies)
This doesn't look like it has anything to do with what you are claiming, being banned for 'believing in copyright'.
It looks like people going to comms specifically set up to share AI generated images, and banning people for bitching about how AI image gen involves disrespect of copyright.
I am no fan of AI gen imagery in about 99.9% of scenarios you'll actually encounter it or hear about it in.
... So I just blocked these communities that are all about that, because they do not interest me, and do not interact with them.
... You can also see that these are comm specific bans, not instance wide bans, as say .world did initially, and then rolled back when people were cheering the UHC CEO getting assasinated.
Looking into a few of these users that have been recently banned, from the modlogs on dbzero... it seems like these users have been getting various comments deleted, with mod explanations why, for days or weeks now, and whoever is modding these StableDiffusion comms just decided to ban them.
Here's the actual dbzero modlogs:
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/modlog
... Also as far as you being a worry wort about 'all of lemmy being banned'... pretty sure that's not possible, the whole point of a federated structure like lemmy is that different instances both host and police themselves.
Could a single instance get taken out? Sure. ... All of them? Seems unlikely without a massive coordinated effort, and afaik, db0 (the instance creator) is pretty tech savvy and has a reasonably secure hosting setup.
Disclaimer: I am neither a dbzero admin nor mod, just a member of the instance.
Oh it’s you again, gonna block all this drama nonsense you keep trying to push lol
Check the Dbzer0 sidebar. The instance is literally explicitly anti-copyright.
load more comments
(1 replies)
TLDR: OP has no idea the difference between comms and instances, or what the fediverse actually is, and thinks dumbasses trolling AI art comms are doing nothing wrong.
It really does seem like the entire concept of decentralized, ground up, mutually interconnected systems... is just actually incomprehensible to a certain number of people.
Things can be organized in a complex manner, but also not centralized with a god king or round table of mob bosses at the top of everything?
Unpossible!!!
I want to talk to the manager's manager!
I mean, there are admins and mods, don't oversell it. ^^' But also I am honestly lost on how do you manage to think of hundreds of interconnected forums basically as one thing.
Its true, there will probably always be admins and mods, to some extent... but like on the dbzer0 instance, they're kind of big into having some open, democratic input back toward the behavior of mods and admins... but yeah I wouldn't say that level of attempting to actually be accountable is common on lemmy in general, so I am overselling it a bit, lol.
At the same time, I stand by the idea that many people just actually cannot comprehend the concept of a non rigid, non totally top down, centralized hierarchy, the concept is not mentally parseable for them.
Which is funny, because even in the most commonly cited examples of such things, like say a military command structure... yeah turns out if you dive into one of those, you often find that its more effective and efficient to give individual units within the larger hierarchy a good deal more leeway and independent decision making autonomy, than it is to keep everything strictly top down... because such a structure can respond better and more quickly when shit goes awry, makes a leadership decapitation strike less devastating, etc etc.
I mean, imma be honest. Hierarchy helps. You need someone up there to see the bigger picture. But you also need enough horizontal movement to be able to execute the piece of it that falls to you.
I am gonna be blunt also, I am one of people who cannot graps actually horizontal structure on bigger tasks etc. I do however get it on smaller scale and with competent people, it's probably hella more efficient. For example thanks to not overloading someone "up there" with decisions and responsibilities.
Oh I completely agree that certain kinds and degrees of hierarchy are or can be more efficient than... absolutely none.
It very much depends on what the organization is attempting to achieve, what its scope and size are.
Generally speaking, you can't really achieve too many complex, specific goals... without some manner of organizing your endeavor.
It sounds like, to me at least, you actually do grasp this better than you think you do, realizing that this is actually a complex topic with many potential variables at play.
You wanna learn a martial art?
How to shoot a gun?
Yeah, a fairly strict, top down, rigid hierarchy with strict rules probably makes more sense, because the potential downsides of 'crowd sourcing' the learning experience could be literally fatal, and these things are usually done at the scale of 5, 10, 20 people in a class.
But, if you scale that exact same structure all the way up to an entire military, you end up with WW1 style shit where entire divisions are thrown into advancing through a friendly artilery barrage due to poor timing or a delayed message, the overall commander being overwhelmed, the rigidity of strict top down adherence to all orders from superiors and fear of insubordination leading to massive catastrophic self inflicted losses.
Conversely, a very, very poorly coordinated set of guerrilla warfare style, totally autonomous allied fighting forces... might accidentally end up ambusing each other, or each cell decides to attack the same percieved enemy vulnerability at the same time, and then all point fingers at each other when they realize no one is now defending some critical asset or area, which has now been captured or destroyed.
For a business endeavor... very similar dynamics can play out.
Maybe far too much management leads to nothing actually getting done, or even worse, dramaticly expensive projects that end up being a barely functional mess, because everyone is spending more time in meetings than working, constantly having their work and project scope changed, altered, amended...
Or maybe there is too little direction, and everyone is doing neat cool pet projects, but the critical underlying business processes are being neglected or overwhelmed.
It is always a balancing act.
If you have a more lateral, more horizontal org structure... those individual units or components need to be more independently capable, which can be more costly than a more streamlined structure, but it can also be more resilient and flexible overall.
And there probably does still need to be some kind of mechanism for coordinating the overall actions of the units/components.
You've also got the whole dynamic of... does your org structure actually promote people to positions of more relative responsibility and power... via merit and actual competency?... or does it just reward sycophantic ass kissers, or self serving, machiavellian behind the scenes manipulators?
Or, if you have a more diffuse, flat, democratic 'power structure'... does it spend all of its time debating things and not actually doing anything? or does it have some method of internally regulating that problem?
I counted a dozen communities where this happened. Typically, when someone is banned from multiple communities for the same reason simultaneously, an admin is involved and that it might be an instance ban in disguise. Is this wrong?
load more comments
(3 replies)
I mean, it's called the fediverse. That alone should cue OP that it's not a single site.
I counted a dozen communities where this happened. Typically, when someone is banned from multiple communities for the same reason simultaneously, an admin is involved and that it might be an instance ban in disguise. Is this wrong?
Dbzer0 is explicitly anti-copyright. It's in the sidebar and when you sign up.
It was a mod that did it, not an admin.
It was a community, not the entire site.
Jesus Christ, reading is a thing.
Jesus Christ, reading is a thing.
Ah, but reading comprehension sadly, is not.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›