Oddbean

No, it's definitely a sexist thing. It's very much "This is a man's protocol, if you can't handle that, girly, get lost." https://image.nostr.build/8165f1b26ebb802e93ae09b45b7495cc699e2f0a11eb395a66bbca7a0734fb03.gif

It is a sexist thing. Women generally don't want freedom. They want walled gardens. You've already started to build walled gardens. Until then, women should take what they dish out. If they can't, then they are too weak for the current environment until it becomes "civilized" enough for them. Trying to use collectivist BS to defend one's self should not be tolerated here. That's all I see in the latest conflagration, and I'm trying to ignore it, but... It's annoying that you're kinda taking the side of the group that I think is wrong in how they are handling something that should never have escalated in the first place.

I hate to be the one to tell you this, but almost all men also don't want your "freedom". Raise your hands, all the men who would show up here to see a feed full of beheadings, kiddie porn, Neonazi propaganda, and rape threats, with no way to silence any of it. This protocol is only useable because the admins hide that stuff. Everyone wants to curate their feed because otherwise the feed is NOT WORTH THE TIME. Some more and some less. And it's not only women who would curate more selectively, if they could.

Sure. But, I don't see any of that stuff. I intentionally don't follow too many people and trim my follow list every so often. And still, what you're talking about is fine, it's the attitude of some that "I should never be exposed to anything other than what I want because I am XYZ" that is the problem. The desire to be protected from is not the same as the desire to have tools to curate a worthy feed. The first leads to collectivist, centralizing BS. The second will hopefully lead to more and better tools for everyone's use, even those that want more nazi loli scat porn. 🤷‍♂️

A problem can be gender-disparate even if the solution shouldn't be. I think about 10% of men have the emotional regulation skills and the discussion skills to thrive in a free speech environment. And maybe 2% of women. We can: 1 - Attempt to upskill other users, by example and by providing useful references. 2 - Provide walled gardens, and gatekeep them 3 - Provide tools for users to create their own personal walled gardens I have to admit my preference is always for (1), but its never going to be enough. I joined the Internet after Eternal September had already begun. Its not ending. If (1) fails too many users, we need to either gatekeep THEM out, or provide (2) or (3). (3) is hard. But i'm working on it...

Yes. The walles garden is yours. It is not imposed on you nor guided by any other. You can grow it as you wish, allow people in as you please, and boot them if you wish. If you have the tools, you can do that automatically.

Here you go, nostr! These are your solutions: nostr:nevent1qqs0jpqsjn8gkuf0gh4d439qzqtfefea9ljk5pm9dkp6p580uum3ejcpz3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wcpzp2t2xk3zgsptsp6ufk3q7prh3940eseetdh66clrpfjg4q3z56nfqvzqqqqqqy4zl72u

My assumption is smart people can understand the principle that centralized control over speech is more harmful than any particular instance of harmful speech. If it turns out to be the case (I have no idea) that women generally are more hostile to that historically incontrovertible fact, that’s fine, but I’m not really interested so much in that. Either way, I’m going to hammer this principle relentlessly in the face of increasingly short-sighted calls for centralized authorities I’m seeing lately. I don’t really care who clutches his or her pearls about it.

Women have a much different way to handle conflict than men. Stunningly, confoundingly different. That's the real issue in the current context. I have zero wish to bring that passive-aggressive mob mentality to the core of nostr. It's gross and goes against an open protocol. Especially with the juvenile name calling and nearly endless ad hominem BS.

That’s probably true to an extent, but I try to avoid generalizing because it’s over*broad* (pun intended). Always prefer to focus on the individual, assume full agency over their behavior, hold them all to the same standards.

Yea I don't care how much I liked you in previous interactions, if I disagree with you, I'm going to be honest. A lot of people just think they know someone they've never met butl liked a few things they said in the past, so they parrot everything they say without thinking about the statement themselves.

Yup. Without the drive of a majority of people in a community to call out BS when they see it, you get cults of personality. It just so happens that many women don't like being called out for BS. That's lame.

IMO this is also the primary reason politics has become an exercise in female antisocial behavior over the past 70 years. All the identity politics, victim mentality, cancel culture, censorship, collectivist action, safety over freedom, emotionally driven patterns that make up the "nanny state" seem to reflect a fundamentally feminine temperament and method of relating to the world. If people want to be treated as individuals, they have to take individual responsibility themselves and also treat others as individuals, not immediately appeal to group identity versus group identity when they encounter obstacles. nostr:note1cpmshwcc3x9fleg3vc8du4w4zg3rzjcpc9qk98gapt2z6svadtks8nv7nl

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by walled gardens here. The way I use Nostr is that I mostly stick to the people I follow since I know it's much more likely they will have something interesting to say. If I'm bored I will switch to general and see if I can find more people to follow. I won't pick arguments with people in general and I won't put anyone on my blocklist unless they specifically tag me with something I find abusive. I am a woman. How does this correspond to the ideas of "freedom" and "walled garden" you're talking about? I don't want a feed that is curated by anyone except me, I don't want anyone else to be censored on my behalf. Nobody can make that decision except me.

The concept of the walled garden is pretty much what you want, just with tools to help curate your feed. It also might imply some automated filtering, especially with Low Information Voter's tool. For example, I'm pretty sure you'd rather not see tyranny porn, and it's possible for you to preemptively filter that. But, again, this is a tool that you would use and set to your own preferences, not something externally imposed on you.

So that's freedom no? Because it gives me the maximal capacity to choose. To me walled garden suggests that someone else is keeping out undesirable stuff on my behalf, whether I want it or no. It's a closed platform I have to specifically subscribe to and probably pay for the privilege, that doesn't interoperate with other systems. That's how AOL worked and largely how Apple works nowadays.

And it was escalated by Marie by hijacking the guy's thread (so that she could defend a leftist's pro-censorship modifications of the protocol) and then trying to dogpile on him. She first escalated, then she pulled the victim card.

I don't see her posts, but that tracks with what others have told me. I could have told you that would happen, and that's one of the reasons why I've had her blocked for months. That's why I said "dishing it out but can't take it" then crying to be defended. Very typical passive aggressive response to a situation and that kind of thing isn't anything I tolerate. If that's the kind of woman I, as a man, an supposed to defend, unconditionally, then I, as a man, would also be a trashy collectivist numpty. I do not defend bad behavior from anyone, even if they are popular. Possibly especially if they are popular. If you have some kind of pull and you use it to get your way even if you're being douchey, then you are doubly culpable. Again: gross. Again: don't start none if ya can't finish none. On your own. Without simpy hoardes to dog pile people you don't like.