I don't like there being forums set to 'public' on open platforms that then say if you aren't in a specific demographic then you aren't allowed to comment.
-
Hey "champ", i never said it was. I said that the way forums work is that if you set your community to appear in All, then that community is supposed to be for all
Or you could just read and respect the community rules. '"I don't like it..." and "supposed to be" are just a recipe for getting yourself annoyed over nothing. Let it go.
-
Or you could just read and respect the community rules. '"I don't like it..." and "supposed to be" are just a recipe for getting yourself annoyed over nothing. Let it go.
Or you could just read and respect the community rules.
Or that forum can just respect the guidelines of Lemmy private/public settings.
And I'm no more worked up about this than you are.
-
The sidebar also says "this is an inclusive community" followed by a rule that excludes 50% of the planet.
And probably 80% of the userbase of the platform.
-
It's not private. It's just targeted to a demographic .
-
It's not private. It's just targeted to a demographic .
It's not just targeted at that group, it's supposedly meant only for that group to be able to participate, so it should be set to private in the community settings. Being set to public is for a community that everyone in the public can participate in, while being set to private is for a community that only some people can participate in.
-
It literally requires every single person currently on the fediverse to actively block it. And it requires every single new person that arrives in the fediverse to learn about this group, learn about their rule, learn how to block a group, and then go ahead and block it. Everyone who comes here has to do that, for every single new user that joins the fediverse. Forever.
The community only excludes men from participating
So not everyone, just half of everyone. Assuming only half of users are men.
-
Which doesn’t appear in anyone’s feed, you only see that when you specifically go to that community’s page. Which is yet another clear factor in why it should be set to private instead of public
If Fedia has a broken GUI, that's not their responsibility. It's the responsibility of All feed users not to badly interact with random posts.
I take issue with you defining "being a non-woman and commenting" as "badly interacting."
-
Bro is absolutely sick to his stomach and vomiting that this one community isn’t specifically designed for him and that people might have to * gulp * read the sidebar.
I've never seen a community's sidebar, since I use Lemmy on my phone like probably half of all users.
-
I've never seen a community's sidebar, since I use Lemmy on my phone like probably half of all users.
So do I? It’s very easy to view the sidebar of a community. It’s a good way to get to know them and understand what unique rules they might have.
-
So do I? It’s very easy to view the sidebar of a community. It’s a good way to get to know them and understand what unique rules they might have.
I'm actually curious, do you use the browser version or a Lemmy app? I'm on Boost and I would have to click into the community if I wanted to see anything more than its name and instance.
-
I'm actually curious, do you use the browser version or a Lemmy app? I'm on Boost and I would have to click into the community if I wanted to see anything more than its name and instance.
I use Voyager and you do have to tap into the community and then I think View Sidebar is an option in another menu
-
It's not just targeted at that group, it's supposedly meant only for that group to be able to participate, so it should be set to private in the community settings. Being set to public is for a community that everyone in the public can participate in, while being set to private is for a community that only some people can participate in.
I view plenty of communities I don't post in because I have no relevant knowledge or experience. Even if I were outright excluded from posting I'd still find the discussions interesting. People don't need to hear my opinion for me to get value out of something.
-
Guess what? If you accidentally break the rules, the mods will helpfully remove the comment and send you a polite reminder! You won't even lose karma over it because there is no karma! At worst you'll experience something women often do in real life: having your voice dismissed.
"Having your voice dismissed due to your gender is wrong."
dismisses your voice due to your gender
I hope that's not a reason they actually give, because it's incredibly hypocritical.
-
if you don’t want to interact with half of community, why not just, dunno…limit visibility?
It's not on the community to make it harder for their target audience to find them. It's on people who scroll the All feed to leave posts alone that don't concern them.
If the post is in all it's in the public forum You don't get to have your safe space in the public forum. If you say something in public then be prepared. If you want to reach the public because of higher traffic does not mean you can tell people not to respond. I know that people will argue that it's not fair but it gives off sealioning, im not touching you vibes.
-
I view plenty of communities I don't post in because I have no relevant knowledge or experience. Even if I were outright excluded from posting I'd still find the discussions interesting. People don't need to hear my opinion for me to get value out of something.
That's your choice. It's a completely different thing.
In fact, we generally consider toxic communities where there is a harsh form of gatekeeping (which in your example would be same result, but the result of the community's choice, not yours).
-
That's your choice. It's a completely different thing.
In fact, we generally consider toxic communities where there is a harsh form of gatekeeping (which in your example would be same result, but the result of the community's choice, not yours).
Do we? And is that form of gatekeeping harsh, or do you think anything that excludes you is "toxic?"
I'd have a hard time thinking of any group I'm a part of that doesn't have rules around who can participate. That's a part of maintaining healthy, relevant discussion in a safe space for members, especially when it's been well documented that this particular group has had their voices overpowered by the group they're excluding.
-
Or you could just read and respect the community rules.
Or that forum can just respect the guidelines of Lemmy private/public settings.
And I'm no more worked up about this than you are.
Or that forum can just respect the guidelines of Lemmy private/public settings.
You should send the mods an email.
And I’m no more worked up about this than you are.
{looks at rest of thread] Suuure.
-
Do we? And is that form of gatekeeping harsh, or do you think anything that excludes you is "toxic?"
I'd have a hard time thinking of any group I'm a part of that doesn't have rules around who can participate. That's a part of maintaining healthy, relevant discussion in a safe space for members, especially when it's been well documented that this particular group has had their voices overpowered by the group they're excluding.
We do, look at how many critique posts there are about toxic neckbeard groups, for example about hardcore technical topics where beginners are ridiculed and excluded (i.e., gatekeeping). Or about gym buff communities, where beginners are ignored or made fun of.
Wouldn't you call those communities toxic?
any group I'm a part of that doesn't have rules around who can participate.
Rules about who can participate are absolutely fine, necessary even. Generally those rules are based on what you do, not who you are, though.
well documented that this particular group has had their voices overpowered by the group they're excluding.
I believe that forcing to identify yourself in some way and heavy moderation would be enough (moderation based on what you do) for an online community. But anyway, I don't have a problem with those rules in general. However, in your original comment you compared a community keeping you out to your own restraint into participating in a community you feel you have nothing to contribute to.
To go back to my example, there is a huge difference between not participating in a technical post that goes over your head and just reading other people's opinion vs being banned for having demonstrated to be at a lower level of understanding (gatekeeping).or do you think anything that excludes you is "toxic?"
To address this tiny veiled provocation, I don't like to participate in communities that gatekeep people, whether I am in the ingroup or not. In fact, I heavily dislike purists in fields I deal with (e.g., selfhosting, tech in general), which is the most common form of gate keeping, and I definitely don't participate in their communities.
-
The sidebar also says "this is an inclusive community" followed by a rule that excludes 50% of the planet.
Inclusive of what counts as "woman" and what's a valid topic. Come on
-
Seriously, that's your retort? Ok fine, I'll rephrase.
It literally requires about half of every single person currently on the fediverse to actively block it. And it requires about half of every single new person that arrives in the fediverse to learn about this group, learn about their rule, learn how to block a group, and then go ahead and block it. About half of everyone who comes here has to do that, for about half of every single new user that joins the fediverse. Forever.
And let's be honest male users are way more than half
