> make server literally with the goal of making it easy and cheap to host, because i think it empowers people to host their own infrastructure
> 1 year later
> "hey Pleroma could be pretty good for people without many resources, even if the devs are all horrible people"
@kaniini I suspect a lot of the hate for Pleroma comes from two sources:
- Historic "political division" between GNU Social and Mastodon as in terms of leftie vs alt-right (which wasn't even GNU Social's developers' doing or desire really), some folks from that space moving to Pleroma and thus to a lot of folks Pleroma being mentally branded that way
- @lain is the fediverse's class clown and recent events have lead many people to associate that kind of irreverent humor with undesirable stuff
@phoe @kaniini well.. I've subscribed to @lain and unsubscribed again before a few times, and looking at their timeline, stuff like https://pleroma.soykaf.com/objects/a7213df9-c372-4662-b466-c76d6ac7d201 and https://pleroma.soykaf.com/objects/b9341afb-6f63-47da-aa4f-77f7df00afe4 is why, and probably is why people get that impression.
(Lain, sorry to talk about you in the third person as if you aren't here. But consider that feedback I guess?)
@pea @lain @kaniini @phoe not what I see when I read them. The first one looks like it's making fun of women organizing together, and the second looks like it's making fun of jewish noses.
And maybe you could make the argument that your interpretation is correct, but it's very hard to distinguish between ironic-social-commentary-meta-bigotry and actual-bigotry, *especially* in this era.
>The first one looks like it's making fun of women organizing together
Yes and ?
It's a mistake people making mistake can be fun.
>and the second looks like it's making fun of jewish noses.
And ?
>*especially* in this era.
Are you saying that people who take quotes/images of other people and then interpret them elsewhere are a problem ?
@mangeurdenuage @lain @phoe @kaniini thanks for proving my point buddy
@mangeurdenuage I'll elaborate, but only because you said "please".
> Yes and ?
> It's a mistake people making mistake can be fun.
You said "yes, and?" to making fun of women organizing. It looks like categorically like misogynistic skepticism that women can successfully organize.
>> and the second looks like it's making fun of jewish noses.
> And ?
Does it need elaboration? Right now when literal nazis are being normalized again?
That's as much elaboration as I'm giving.
This is where we are disagreeing but that's just because we have both different definition of misogyny and different interpretation of the scene, and that's ok.
For me it's just making fun of a silly mistake that some people did and that's all, I don't overthink to the point of asking myself if there's an inferior sex.
>>Does it need elaboration? Right now when literal nazis are being normalized again?
Again that's just because we think and interpret differently and it's very interesting for my pov.
Is it reasonable to think that everyone who makes a jokes about X stereotype is actively supporting a specific ideology ? I do not say that such people do not exist I'm saying that it is improbable irl to have people who really believe such things.
>>That's as much elaboration as I'm giving.
Thank you for being cordial.
I would like to exchange more in the future. I really would like to understand why there's such difference in our way of understanding/seeing the world.
Again thank you.