this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2023
278 points (95.7% liked)

sh.itjust.works Main Community

7718 readers
1 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

Matrix

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
TheDude@sh.itjust.works
manifex@sh.itjust.works
biela@sh.itjust.works
imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works
278
does sh.itjust.works allow criticism of CCP? (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 1 year ago by wriggly3171@sh.itjust.works to c/main@sh.itjust.works
288 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I have seen that the lemmy.ml mods will openly ban discussion about the CCP. I am wondering if the sh.itjust.works team allows criticism of government bodies, while still banning racism.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jnj@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is that post really anti us and pro china though? To me it looks like anti pro us, and anti anti china.

I had already formed conclusions after reading through one of the founder's comment histories (which I'd encourage), so my reading of it may have been biased. Either way it's clear that the motivation driving them is, or at least was, largely political in nature.

Also, how do you see the founders controlling the project more? Especially at the “much deeper level”?

They own the github repo, they control what code gets committed, they control whether the project lives or dies really. They have the power to lose interest or decide to abandon the project, at which point the best hope the community has is that others pick it up. It's not normally something I worry too much about with open source projects but again, strong geopolitical associations makes it feel precarious to me -- if they don't like where things are going, maybe they'd feel motivated to actively shut it down and discourage any peaceful transition of (code) ownership. Obviously this is all conjecture.

I’m a New Zealander living in The Netherlands, whether you choose to believe that or not.

I'm not sure why you think I'd have trouble believing that!

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Couldn't someone just fork it and update current servers with that fork and still keep all of the data though? It should still just work the same but just not be from a codebase controlled by the founders

[–] carbon_based@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'd think if they would resist a "global citizen" approach in favour of the now de-facto "hegemonic nations" approach, that would be a good reason for offering such a fork. ... It could quickly supersede the "old Lemmy" when people start to realise that the new system allows migration and resilience against domain-takedowns. :-)
@CowsLookLikeMaps@sh.itjust.works

[–] CowsLookLikeMaps@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's right. It's a legitimate solution if the lead dev drives it into the ground. I don't think lack of developers to fork or maintain it would be an issue. The only barrier I see is adoption of yet another platform. So in my mind, there's always an option to just separate if Lemmy turns into one big tankie brigade. But forking is still a PITA and not ideal.

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't think using a fork would separate it into another platform. It would still be Lemmy. They would only need to separate of their code bases change so drastically between the two that going to other instances from the forked one starts breaking things. And even then workarounds could then be put in the former version so everything still plays nice.