this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
-61 points (38.9% liked)

/0 Governance

249 readers
144 users here now

A community for discussion and democratic decision making in the Divisions by zero.

Anyone with voting rights can open a governance thread and initiate a vote or a discussion. There's no special keywords you must be aware of before you open a thread, but there are some. here's the governance thread manual.

Answers

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Update: Although we officially still have a few days remaining on this vote, it seems clear that this proposal won't be voted in.

Thanks to everyone for their feedback and votes! I had expected a split vote on this one and it turned out around 1/3 for the proposal and 2/3 against, so that is a quite emphatic no! And of course, we will respect the vote.

I hope we can maybe revisit our instance blocking policies more generally after lemmy has properly working per-user instance blocks, as some folks commented as it will open up more options for personal choice. For example, we could keep a list of sanctioned instances (like csam site) as it works now, but maintain a separate list of "use with caution" instances (aka hesitations in fediseer) that are blocked by default in each user's personal blocklist. But now users could choose to enable those sites for themselves if they wanted to.

For me, that seems like the best overall solution for user choice, and for the new user experience. But it may not sound good to you folks, so that's why we have the voting system in place so we can get quality feedback and also hopefully generate ideas for improvements that will benefit the community.

On that note, anyone can contact me or any of the site admins if they have a proposal they want to appear here on the governance community, and we'll be happy to help you out.

Unruffled


Hi mateys. I'm gonna keep this short and sweet because I don't really have any skin in the game on this one. I am in fact quite happy to leave this decision up to the wider dbzer0 community. On that note, please do not comment on this post unless you are a dbzer0 user - we'd prefer not to have anyone else weighing in.

This post isn't to convince anyone to re-federate or otherwise. In fact, our admin team genuinely doesn't know for sure what our community sentiment is on the topic, or whether or not it's worth a try. My guess is that the community will be quite divided on the topic, as many users are on the topic of hexbear. But the only way to find out for sure is to ask you, so here we are.

But I will say that for me personally, although we still have the occasional drama, and despite past run-ins, I have slowly grown to appreciate having some hexbear users around to help balance out all the turbolibs. While I think its fair to say our instance and theirs will never see eye-to-eye on certain topics, we have coexisted with them in relative calm over the past 12 months. If we can achieve ~~harmony~~a ceasefire with hexbear, then maybe we could do the same with lemmygrad?

I'd also prefer our users to make their own choices with regard to instance blocking of leftist sites in particular.

Obviously there will be some folks here that will hate this idea, and some who think it is worth a try and/or would like to make their own choices with regards to blocking. All I will ask is that you go have a look at lemmygrad.ml before you vote, and ask yourself if there is anything posted there you think warrants keeping them defederated?

Because this might be a divisive topic, I'm setting the threshold for this proposal succeeding at >66.6% majority rather than the default >50% so that there is a clear mandate.

The proposal is as follows:

That dbzer0 removes lemmygrad.ml from our blocked instances list for a 1-month trial period. Another vote will then be conducted to either federate permanently or to reinstate the instance block.

Notes

  • AFAIK none of our admins have discussed this with lemmygrad prior to this post, so we don't know how they will respond, even if this vote succeeds. But having just checked, we are not currently blocked from their end, so in theory re-federating will be a straightforward process (at least technically).
  • We really don't want to cause a big rift in our instance over this, so please there is really no need to get into heated arguments (I mean, what are the chances? Lol). Your vote is what counts most and we will commit to be guided by the voting outcome.
  • If this vote succeeds we will reach out to their admins to see if we can come to some mutual agreement about reintegrating our communities while hopefully keeping conflict to a minimum. Having said that, some conflict is probably inevitable ngl. But I think we will be able to ride it out ok.
  • I've covered a lot of concerns and talked about conflict a lot, so I'll just add that the big positive of re-federating is that there will be a ton of new users and content to interact with, which will hopefully add to the Lemmy experience for our users if the proposal is voted in.

expiry: 7

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (4 children)

Hard disagree. Honestly, this would even be a compelling reason for me to leave this instance and spin up my own. I wanted to try out running an instance for quite some time now, and this would probably push me further toward that. That wouldn't have an impact on my moderation efforts, e.g. in c/piracy; there would be a smooth transfer.

little rantHonestly, there are even more points that bother me about this instance. For example, the outright hate for cryptocurrency. Yeah, I'm aware of the anarchist theory of having no money or currency at all, but the first step is perhaps creating a better currency/money system with fewer inherent issues. It's hard to objectively judge whether crypto is better or worse per se, as there are always some positive and some negative aspects, but I don't understand why an anarchist instance pushes for a state-controlled, state-issued currency and hates decentralized attempts to create a currency controlled by the people. Sure, I don't like Bitcoin either, especially because of the privacy concerns, but Monero is a solid option with privacy/anonymity as a core design feature and an algorithm that makes using GPUs or ASICs unfeasible to try to democratize the mining process. At the same time, the criticism of AI, a similarly controversial topic, is restricted by policy. This doesn't make sense to me. I neither love nor hate AI, and I neither love nor hate cryptocurrency, but I think we should be able to have healthy and constructive debates/discussions about both without any instance-wide restrictions.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

We're pro-GenAI and anti-crypto, because I started this instance, and those are my takes. I wanted to attract people who think the same way as I do in my instance.

I don't see any saving graces to cryptocurrencies. They're just a scam gallore. Monero sounds good in theory until you realize that not only is it not used nearly enough to prove it scales (all crypto doesn't), but that it also makes everyone using it engage in money laundering by design.

We also don't prevent GenAI criticism as a blanket rule. I criticise corporate GenAI and its hype plenty. We just have a rule to prevent GenAI haters causing flamewars under every goddamn GenAI image

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 14 hours ago

Check the top of the post again, I've provided an update.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 18 hours ago

think we should be able to have healthy and constructive debates/discussions about both without any instance-wide restrictions.

Maybe that could be the topic for another governance vote