Would you trust yourself with infinite wealth?
ShareMySims @ ShareMySims @lemmy.dbzer0.com Posts 5Comments 111Joined 6 mo. ago
ShareMySims @ ShareMySims @lemmy.dbzer0.com
Posts
5
Comments
111
Joined
6 mo. ago
Thanks for the heads up.
OP - my feedback is fix this.
Ok, fantastic! I definitely agree with trying it out more open at first and then adjusting as/if needed when issues come up. Which they're bound to, because we're a bunch of random people on the internet after all, but I think addressing them as they come would be easier both on you in terms of not having to plan ahead for every eventuality (easier said than done, I know), but also easier to resolve each individual issue, because it'll be right in front of you/the community to assess and consider as is, rather than a hypothetical.
Thanks for taking the time to talk things through and clarify, it is very much appreciated, and is a great sign of things to come!
Maybe I'm misunderstanding? From what I gather from this post, while those who have been vouched for (and thrediverse enjoyers) can vote, but only those who donate can open threads up in the relevant comm, which to my understanding is the only way to bring issues up for a vote in the first place? That seems like more privilege.
Like I said, I hear you, and I understand that it is a complicated issue to resolve, and that this is only an initial solution, but that you are aware and taking it in to consideration, and I'm genuinely not trying to give you a hard time or be a pain, just wanting to keep my concern on the record.
Subscribed.
Now I know we've discussed this and that you've clearly explained why this is currently the case and heard and understood my concerns (as I have yours), and also clarified here that it is just an initial solution, so I'm not trying to rehash the discussion, but just want to stay on the record saying that I am uncomfortable with those who can donate money being given more privilege/power, however seemingly minor, than those who can't, and I am really hoping a better solution can be worked out eventually.
Either way, thank you for all the time and resources you have and are investing in this instance, this development is genuinely exciting, and I can't wait to see how it'll work in practice!
Yeah, like I said, I understand that they are not the same and that online communities bring up challenges that irl ones don't, but I think we should still try to apply as many of the same principals to online communities as we would to irl ones as possible.
That said, I absolutely recognise that not everyone has the funds or energy to be seen, which is why I want to provide other ways for recognition to happen.
Cool, that's basically the point I was aiming at with far too many words lol and just to reiterate, none of it was criticism or doubt of your admining, just wanting to highlight potential pitfalls.
Re flairs and tags, thanks for clarifying! It's completely understandable that it isn't a top priority, it isn't one for me as a user either, though I do like the idea of a personal strike system for milder offenders before resorting to blocking lol but also to highlight friendlies, since I'm terrible with names 😂I'll have to keep an eye out for interesting extensions..
Well if someone cannot donate and cannot be seen contributing in any way, there’s very few ways to validate they’re a contributing member in the comm
Change online "comm" to real life "community" and that becomes pretty problematic (we should not be relating levels of contribution to levels of rights and power/say).
I'm genuinely not trying to give you a hard time, and I understand that the two are not the same, and that running an online community has its unique challenges (anonymity, trolls, sock accounts, vote manipulation, and on and on), but I also think it's really important to keep the framing of things in mind because it can be so fucking easy to default, even without wanting or meaning to, to the hierarchal constructs we are familiar and surrounded with.
I've never run any community or organisation online or irl, not even modded a community (was only appointed as one on my previous shitjustworks account as a backup), so I don't claim to fully understand the challenges you face in implementing this, or have a magic solution to offer, but I think these points are fundamental and worth highlighting, so I am.
As for the tagging, just to clarify, because I think I misunderstood what a tag or flair is, are they the same? I assumed a flair was the emoji looking things, and those it makes sense that only you can add, in my mind a tag would be like some of the apps have, where you can tag a user as say "troll" rather than blocking, but is that not a thing that is happening here? (sorry, I'm only just waking and baking lol)
Initial plan is that every subscriber should be allowed to vote, but only subscribers who fund a lot can open new votes for mandates.
I feel like this puts the poorest people in the community who may not be able to afford to donate as much or at all at a significant disadvantage and creates an unnecessary hierarchy (as well as, like you say, room for manipulation, someone who can afford to donate more having more power is icky), as do the different tiers for level of donation.
I can understand why you want to limit voting to people who are an active part of the community (though again, there becomes a hierarchy, like what about people who mostly lurk and only comment rarely? Do we start questioning why someone doesn't participate as much as others? Neurodiversity and other health issues can play a huge part, as can poor education and access to information so someone might not feel confident enough to be very active, but are they then lesser members of the community? What about people who don't have regular access to a device or reliable internet?), and I agree that there should be some way to tell who is a member in good faith and who isn't, but I really don't think that basing it on monetary value and stakeholders (which feels far too close in concept to shareholders), or ranking users in general is the way to go.
In any case, I think the fact that you want to make the instance's running more communal is fantastic, and I think the idea itself is good, but parts of it might still need a little more cooking lol
As for the tags, can we as users tag other users? Will they see the tag, or that we tagged them? Will you, as a sysadmin?
You're welcome, and remember that they're for browsing, not necessarily consuming in bulk, some of them I've never read the whole way through, but they provide answers to specific questions and are great for dipping in and out of.
Well, not anymore!
Hey now, mansplaining does have its uses..
I don't mean to sound callous, but shit happens, especially with pets. Dogs are notorious for eating things they shouldn't, I assure you a dog could find something to get in to that they shouldn't and that could harm or even kill them even in the tidiest house.
Now if you'd said you didn't take her to her appointment, or didn't even call the vet, I'd have some harsh things to say, but you reacted and acted appropriately to an accident.
You did the right thing in a difficult situation, try not to beat yourself up over it or hold yourself up to an impossible (read: neurotypical) standard (easier said than done, I know), and be there for her as she recovers.
I suppose you could say both are pipelines in a manner of speaking, the difference is that one is designed to target the ego and promote artificial and toxic individualism in the service of a powerful few, while the other is designed to target our natural need for community and cooperation in the service of all members of the group.
One has to be promoted artificially, dishonestly (most often by co-opting leftist ideas, see national "socialism"), and at great cost to be effective, while the other just needs to be (unless my comrades are getting those Soros cheques I missed out on? lol).
Most people, when presented with leftist ideas with the "scary" isms removed, tend to agree with them, it is the capitalist indoctrination that makes them fear said isms. Remove the indoctrination and the systems it supports, provide people with their needs rather than hold them hostage behind a paywall, as well as providing an honest and critical education, and the left wouldn't need a pipeline at all.
Meanwhile the right already have things their way, and yet they're still dependent on those levels of deep manipulation to recruit to their side, because their side is shit and only serves a handful of people.
Anyway, I'm rambling, as for resources, these are unfortunately not as accessible as a graphic history, but here are some links I have saved for more general introductory material, and a couple of more topic specific articles to get you going (they're not all from there, but in general, the anarchist library is a great resource, it can take some navigating to find what you're after, but if nothing else, you're guaranteed to find something interesting and informative on the way):
anarchism - a beginner’s guide
What is Communist Anarchism? Now and After: The ABC of Communist Anarchism
Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You!
How Nonviolence Protects the State
Red Flags: Before You Join That Org
E: as for the bullshit notion that we must platform and listen to fascists and other bigots "for balance" or to avoid an "echo chamber" or whatever other bullshit - NO. Our priority is to survive in spite of those people, not to allow them to continue to walk all over us and invade literally every single space in existence so that they don't feel excluded. Fuck that.
Society can not, and never will be, fixed from the top.
Nor is money the solution to our problems, if anything, it is a huge part of the cause (and why communism aspires to a moneyless society, among other things).
So even if I say I'd only accept the money if I could instantly redistribute it, as long as other billionaires, and the systems that create and uphold them, exist, my personal actions would probably make little difference in the long run, and any money I shared would end up right back in their pockets (by virtue of how capitalism works).