this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
108 points (82.5% liked)
Privacy
31932 readers
794 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The screenshot shows an off-topic comment that complains about other comments being "left up", and the CEO that answers that nothing has been deleted, in fact (I suppose in regards to the topic). The thread in the screenshot was (going to be) deleted because it's off-topic, it's a meta-conversation that doesn't add anything to the general discussion, if not noise and chaos (and tbh, following long conversation in discord is already terrible as it is).
I guess it's the word of two different people in that Mastodon thread vs the word of the guy who moved all discussion to his personal Discord server to begin with.
The second person (I think) referred to the thread in the screenshot when they said "I saw it disappearing live". I have no problems believing that the guy deleted that thread, it's an off-topic thread. What I have problem to believe is that the guy specifically deleted comments from queer folks (which is the point of this post). And again, the person who started the Mastodon thread is someone that - in my view - has no credibility at all, considering the completely dishonest way in which they carried out the conversation.
Not sure what the screenshot you posted is supposed to prove. He closed a thread on the kagifeedback site asking to move the discussion (if needed) in Kagi Discord, where - in fact - happened (although with very little benefit for anybody). AFAIK it's not "his personal Discord" server, it's Kagi's server, and I believe most of the conversation (including the one in the "incriminating" screenshot) happened in
#general. I am really not sure what your point is.Either way, it doesn't matter what I believe. What I know is that the person making the Mastodon thread is someone in bad faith and with (in my opinion) completely bad takes. Someone who makes such a post, in my opinion is a moron.
It's much easier to stifle disagreement and feign objectivity after you silence a publicly accessible conversation and move it to a private Discord server. Discord makes it remarkably easy to censor comments without ever being able to prove they were there.
Even if we assume the Kagi CEO is totally blameless, he made a massive optical blunder by deciding to silence public criticism and shift it onto turf he controls even more tightly.
If you want to make the case that the two Mastodon users are liars, then you need to prove more than a personal disagreement. And so far, arguing about one of the hardest to define words in the English language is hardly proof.
There is a point that I am clearly failing to make.
All the disagreement about the brave stuff, about the topic that generated discussion is there. You can check for yourself in discord or on the forum. I also want to note that the forum post has been closed temporarily and reopened several times. It's not completely unreasonable to close a topic when the discussions are going completely off the rails, which in this case was happening (both critics and supporters did that).
That said, there is nothing that evidently shows the intention to stifle disagreement, including the request to move the discussion elsewhere (discord has tons of critical content even now). However, the user who started the thread wanted to discuss something else, which is not related to the discussion at hand, but related to how they moderated the discussion (claiming something we have no idea about. Were their comments really deleted? What was their content? Were they maybe violating some rule? Who knows what they wrote, maybe the insulted other users directly). We have no proof whatsoever that they censored comments from queer folks specifically (which is the whole argument of the thread, both mastodon one and the screenshot attached), there is only that user claiming they did because their comments were allegedly deleted (maybe it's true, but again, who knows why). Considering that there is plenty of criticism still present in both discord and the forum, I don't see how I need to suspend the judgment to call that claim bullshit, because I can objectively see that criticism was not censored. In addition to that, I can also make a judgment based on character. That user used completely bullshit claims to fabricate accusations, in that very same context. The whole point of that threat was a smear campaign against that guy, and they didn't bother at all to repeat what they posted, for example, or make a proper argument. They just claimed something with a screenshot that doesn't give any information and other supporting arguments that are even more ridiculous (the country site and the "interpretation" of a sentence that I quoted above).
I am not even sure why there is the need to discuss anything coming from that person. If that was a conservative/trump supporter making some claim with analogue arguments, they would be laughed out of Mastodon (rightfully). And that is the only source about the attitude towards LGBTQ+ folks. Don't you think that before making such a broad statement, we should have at least some consistent pattern? A bunch of examples that show the attitude or something like that?
And no, it's not "two users" because, as I said before, from what I understand the other user referred to the thread in the screenshot, not to the "critical comments" deleted before, which we have no idea about.