Post #1561227

2026-04-07 19:14 UTC

@stefanie Most "bigger tent" arguments translate to "let the Nazis in". Marginalised communities, in my admittedly limited experience, have more issues with keeping them out. It's baffling that this take comes from someone even mildly involved with the fediverse of all places. @haubles

Replies (2)

@stefanie@social.anoxinon.de 2026-04-07 19:21

@jens @haubles Yeah. Those poor fascists and TERFs and GenAI peddlers must really feel discriminated against because there is a place where their "views" are not universally welcomed with open arms. Is there hate on here? Sure. Are you forced to engage with it? Absolutely not. But what they want is a system like on Facebook, where misgendering trans people is explicitly allowed, but calling a TERF a TERF gets you banned. Or on Twitter where you can just pay your way into everyones feed.

Open ##1561228
@jdp23@neuromatch.social 2026-04-07 21:05

Is it really baffling though? This is the whole "Big Fedi" approach that Evan and others advocate. In The (annotated) case for "Big Fedi I used italics to highlight what's implied but usually left unsaid "Everyone on the planet should have an account on the fediverse (even Nazis, racists, transphobes, white supremacists, hate groups who target people of color, LGBTQIA2S+ people, and other marginalized communities). It will make the internet better and the world better (if Nazis et al are on the fediverse, as opposed to trying to keep them off) Under Eugen, Mastodon tended to be on the "Big Fedi" side -- seeing Threads' decision to adopt ActivityPub as a huge victory for the cause, opposing opt-in federation as contrary to Mastodon's mission, etc. So I see this more as a longstanding tension in fedi that's just manifesting in a different way. @jens @stefanie @haubles

Open ##1561229