In case anyone is wondering, it’s rqd2.
The definition of paraphilia is “a condition characterized by abnormal sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities.”, which can inclde pedophilia.
It has recieved 4 censures from fediseer due to the content contained on that instance
Not a good look for Lemmy to be promoting any instance like that.
Update: A pull request was sent to remove the sus instance. It should no longer show up soon
Sry about that yall, I was out today.
Its gone now thx to @[email protected] .
Any admins as well as anyone that runs instance discoverers / crawlers like join-lemmy.org be sure to update your blocklists,.
Edit: In the future if anyone could make PR’s to this file, we’ll try to get to them ASAP.
Thank you
Sorry if you’ve had to answer this question too much… where can I find out why these instances have been added to the blocklist? Some of them I recognise from previous incidences where someone has flagged them as problematic & provided evidence but some are confusing. I’m nervous about checking them out, but I clicked on one because it sounded very innocuous.
lemmy.glasgow.social just appears to be an instance discussing social events in Glasgow, Scotland, with additional focus on hacking / computer science… how come it’s been blocked? In the modlog I can see that they had a bit of a user purge about 3 months ago with no actions taken since then. But there’s never been any deleted comments or posts.
You can see the git log, or look at the PRs on that repo that edited that recommended-instances file.
Thanks.
I don’t have a link, but the lemmy creators (and maintainers of join-lemmy) answered this in a AMA about a month ago. They said they’d prefer the horrible people concentrate in their own instances so we can block them easily rather than have them in our instances. The join lemmy list does not serve as an endorsement, but a catalog of all available instances.
deleted by creator
I don’t have a link, but the lemmy creators (and maintainers of join-lemmy) answered this in a AMA about a month ago. They said they’d prefer the horrible people concentrate in their own instances so we can block them easily rather than have them in our instances. The join lemmy list does not serve as an endorsement, but a catalog of all available instances.
Neither burggit nor comfysnug are shown on the instances page.
I’m not sure why. Maybe should ask them.
That was an interesting rabbit hole I just went through. There was a post about French postmodern philosophers who defended pedophilia that was posted on that instance as a validation to their cause, meanwhile all the comments under the video are of people recounting their trauma of being sexually assaulted as children.
Thanks to your awareness, its now the most popular listed.
I’ll just leave these here…
https://www.rainn.org/news/how-prevent-child-sexual-abuse-material-csam
Err, are you sure about your words op? I just looked at their sidebar and it looks pretty clear about that, no?
Quoting :
“Nothing illegal under US (specifically Nevada) or local law. You know what that includes. (In case you don’t know what that includes, I mean child pornography [anything that fails the Dost Test], sexually interacting with minors, etc.) We have a zero tolerance policy for anything that fails the Dost test. Anything violating it will result in an immediate ban and removal of images. No admitting to anything that could cause the server to go under investigation, such as looking at child porn.”
Edit : Well, looks like they don’t enforce this rule indeed.
Don’t be fooled, check the fediseer link provided in the post for examples
Their biggest community is a MAP community where they don’t even pretend to not be pedos
I think it just auto-discovers federated instances and randomly shows them on the page unless explicitly disabled…
True but it still isn’t a very good look for lemmy.
The only ones who have to be concerned about the looks are the instance admins.
Lemmy isn’t a product in need of marketing.You’re right, but this is the sort of thing that gets blown up by the media and used to shut down privacy-friendly platforms.
Maybe it’s a slippery slope fallacy on my part, but it’s not unimaginable to consider the idea that legislators could try to take down an enitre platform based on something like this. Just look at some of the proposed privacy-antagonistic legislation that’s been introduced recently to see what I mean.
The Fediverse isn’t a platform with a server you can take down, though. That’s the beauty of decentralization.
Midwest Social?
This is like criticising a knife enthusiasts group because knives could be used to commit crime.
It’s ok to have a community for kinky people. The fact that certain individuals look at illegal stuff doesn’t mean we should get rid of the instance, nor hide it from people who want to use it.
I do not care if people have a cuckolding, scat or whatever fetish they want, as long as it involves consent of some sort.
Children cannot consent for sexual acts. Being at the recieving end of such actions irrepeairably scars their mental life forever; and any person who’s ok with this deserves torture before death.
If you actually read my post, you would know we’re on the same side.
deleted by creator
Ok, that has literally nothing to do with my argument, which is to not punish person x for what person y does.
deleted by creator
The point of the thread is to hide an instance from search, which punishes more than just the unethical people OP is straw-manning about.
deleted by creator
You realize that they host MAP, beastiality, and zoophilia communities?
It’s one thing to host kinky communities (a-ok as long as it’s legal), it’s another to host pedo communities. Check the fediseer link listed in the post for examples.
Hate to ask, but it’s probably better than searching, what’s MAP in this context?
Minor Attracted Person
So you think people with more ethical kinks should be punished because unethical communities exist?
deleted by creator
I am defending the ethical users having a place to go.
The ones who are “hell-bent” are the ones eager to use their pitchforks on the entire instance, ethical or otherwise.
deleted by creator
You don’t get to decide what I am defending.
deleted by creator
No, it’s like criticising a murder enthusiasts group because murder is a crime.
being a pedo is not a kink. don’t really understand why it’s that hard to understand.
What you are doing is called the straw man fallacy. Obvs pedophilia isn’t a kink, and you would know I wasn’t defending it if you had good reading comprehension skills.
Yeah I guess when your dumass said “It’s ok to have a community for kinky people.” I mistakenly thought that you meant that pedos are a kink community. Honestly don’t know how I could have misread that. fuckwit
Ok, pedos are here now.
I’m more of a milf guy but keep pushing your narrative if it makes you feel special.
