• duviobaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If people prevent something being used by tons of other people for no good reason, then this would be a very good one to “hold a grudge” against them for.

    Do i really have to explain such a simple thing to someone. Holy shit it’s like im on Reddit again.

    EDIT: Holy shit i am talking about those morons DDOSing lemmy.world

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Lol “no good reason” does not apply to the decisions the Lemmy.world admins have made for which instances to defederate from or what content to allow. They have been very straight forward with those decisions and explaining why.

      Not liking their decision doesn’t mean there is “no good reason”.

      • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Explaining the reason for making a decision doesn’t mean it’s an actual good reason btw.

          • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            No, I don’t. They chose to preemptively defederate from an instance because some people might maybe not actually break their rules but just talk about their ideologies that the precious admin didn’t agree with.

            Why not just handle rule breakers if and when they break rules? Why ban an entire instance because you disagree with some of their ideologies?

            Can you explain why you agree with their stance, if you do?

    • gears@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If people prevent something being used by tons of other people for no good reason, then this would be a very good one to “hold a grudge” against them for.

      Are you talking about the DDoSers or the admins of lemmy.world? Because, yes, everyone who is trying to use lemmy.world that can’t should hold a grudge against the skids who bought a DDoS service subscription.

      If you’re talking about the admins, you should be more specific. Are you saying that them defederating from another instance is a good reason for that other instance’s users to hold a grudge and DDoS? Because I would bed to differ if that’s the case.

    • deejay4am@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s worded confusingly. Let me see if I’m correct here:

      If people prevent something being used by tons of other people for no good reason

      This is not in reference to the lemmy.world users being prevented from using the instance, but instead is about the possible motivation of said attack

      then this would be a very good one to “hold a grudge” against them for.

      Continuing on to say that you could understand how a person could hold a grudge over a perceived slight

      The way you worded it make it sound like you mean lemmy.world users should hold a grudge against the attackers for preventing them from using lemmy.world, which is why people are confused. It might have been better to say like “The attackers are probably retaliating for being banned or something”