Dominic Duffin is a user on mastodon.cloud. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.

Mastodon Politics Show more

Mastodon Politics Show more

Mastodon Politics Show more

Mastodon Politics Show more

Mastodon Politics Show more

Mastodon Politics Show more

@herrabre @falleroffalls if the fediverse continues to increase in numbers of active users then I expect there to be a variety of approaches towards resolving the problems of social relations. Instances which recruit a voluntary or perhaps even professional police force (if they can get donations for that) will eventually just duplicate the problems of the silos. You end up with a bureaucracy and a system of rules, and then it becomes a question of who makes the rules. Even if you started out with the intention of reducing harassment, or whatever, before you know it you've got the same old familiar problems.

The people who want to use blocks as a political tactic to pressure this or that admin are just trying to create a status hierarchy with themselves at the top of a chain of command. It's a familiar game.

@bob @fallerOfFalls The counterpoint to that, is that when there are no rules then the weakest suffer.

Having a hierarchy isn't always a bad thing. Having rules isn't always a bad thing. Even having a benevolent dictator can be a great solution, as long as it lasts.

Extremes tend to be wrong, no matter which direction they take.

Dominic Duffin @dominicduffin1

@HerraBRE @bob @fallerOfFalls I agree. Rules and hierarchies are a necessary part of human society, and as you say, without rules the weakest suffer in a free-for-all. Since rules are hard to enforce without hierarchies, we need them also. We may not always like the rules and hierarchies, but not having them would be worse. The good thing about Mastodon is that we can choose which instance to use, and each instance has its own rules.

ยท 0 ยท 0

@fallerOfFalls @bob @HerraBRE And because of the ability of users to choose instances, we can have the advantages of benevolent dictatorship (long-term thinking, stability, a general care for the community even if not everyone agrees) without the disadvantages (potential for tyranny/repression) because users can choose their dictator through choosing an instance. If the dictator goes too far everyone can leave and the dictator can't stop them.

@dominicduffin1 @herrabre @falleroffalls with rules the weakest suffer. The rules are often stacked against them. The main point with rules is that they should be agreed upon.

Too much hierarchy and rules lead to dysfunctional systems. There's the David Graeber book called "The Utopia of Rules" which describes this to some extent.

@bob @fallerOfFalls @HerraBRE Its true that the rules are often stacked against the weak, but equally, without rules, the weak suffer because unfortunately the strong will ride roughshod over the weak in a free-for-all contest. As long as rules are clear and enforced fairly, rules give the weak a chance. Problems occur when the rules are applied selectively (an in-between worst of both worlds that's unfortunately fairly common in the world)