Needs some alternate if they have video autoplay disabled. How about sending them to some support group/resource on leaving a hate group?

thanks @connyduck! I believe I've addressed the feedback and, um, added some tests.

I agree with @kyefox here - blacklisting fascists from using Tusky is certainly reasonable and within your rights, but doing something more positive than rickrolling seems like a valuable opportunity.

I think that it violates the GPL if this project won't accept a new merge which fixes that problem.
I understand that it is a joke. I just wanted to make this statement clear.
(I don't even care about politics and I am not a part of those instances, but I noticed the "drama" on the Fediverse)

This is why I think that:
"One important way to modify a program is by merging in available free subroutines and modules. If the program's license says that you cannot merge in a suitably licensed existing module — for instance, if it requires you to be the copyright holder of any code you add — then the license is too restrictive to qualify as free.

Whether a change constitutes an improvement is a subjective matter. If your right to modify a program is limited, in substance, to changes that someone else considers an improvement, that program is not free. "

source: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

@Robin-Wils That's not what that means - that's discussing third-party external modules with license compatibility, and whether a license prohibiting you from merging them into your source tree on the basis of you not writing them, and distributing the result, counts as free. That doesn't apply here in any way, shape, or form.

It says nothing about any obligation on developers to merge your changes into their tree.

Ok, that's cool, I just wanted to mention my thoughts.
I don't want to put anyone in trouble, I just wanted to warn the project.
Thanks for understanding.

The project will probably lose some users because of this though.
Mixing politics into software is kinda a weird decision.

I might stop commenting now, since I don't want to create drama.

I think that a rick-roll would be counterproductive.

Instead, perhaps displaying a message stating that the developers of this application do not want their application be used to show hate speech would be more productive.

It also reduces any possible ambiguity for the userbase of these instances of what is going on (presuming the intent is to expand this list past gab in the future), and will also ensure that the occasional stray fedi user who might have accidentally signed up on an awful instance[1] will be able to realize why they can't log in anymore and probably more importantly help what they can do about it.

Not to mention, at least in my eyes, a rickroll is quite an unprofessional addition for what I see as otherwise a rather professionally designed application.

[1]: Somewhat uncommon but it does happen.

@noirscape there are indeed people who consider themselves free speech maximalists (and maybe aren't personally anti-nazi enough to be upset by being in nazis' vicinity) who could misconstrue a no-context rickroll as being "anti free speech" or "haters" or something. Even if the rickroll is kept in (cuz let's be honest, screw Nazis) a little note saying why the instance is blocked (that link to anti-hate-group help is a great idea) could be most effective.

This makes yall no worse than twitter, sure some are bad in it, but also my bet is more baby boomers use Gab rather than more nazis.

Haha, nice, you also censor on github.

Seriously you cannot even handle that someone disagree with you ?

No, it means that we don't freaking care if you uninstall app or not. Comment is not deleted, it's hidden because it's irrelevant. If you have some valid feedback besides *"I want to log into Gab and it pupsets me", go on.

@charlag it's not about login. It's about your choice to censorship.
What's next? Maybe ban logging into FSE? Or maybe screw all that decentralization and enforce a whitelist?

And I don't think suggesting to NOT hardcode this is an offtopic, which is #1303 (comment).

Slippery slope fallacy? "If you don't want to feed Nazi today then what, tomorrow you won't feed those sick children?"

I will just leave it here:
https://xkcd.com/1357/

Fediverse was started as free and uncensored network. Your censorship is actually equal to fascism. No matter who's "good" or "evil" here — the censorship itself is clear evil. No exceptions.

@charlag show the door on your private instance, not in public software. Or better, in your own account only.

Anyway, I'm done here. It's your choice, your software, you're the developers, not me. But don't get suprised by the consequences: userbase loss, uncontrollable forks and community full of hysterical offended assholes.

I run my own Mastodon instance.
I didn't even know what Gab was before all of that.
And I'm French, we don't have the same concept of free speech as American.

But yeah, I need to trust apps installed on my phone.
With this modification you are doing something against the will of the user. There is no slippery slope argument/fallacy needed here, it is already inacceptable.

But if you are implementing things that go against the will of the user in one case, that mean that you are not opposed to the principle of it. I cannot and don't need to prove you won't "cross the line" again, you proved that you did once, that is enough to state that you are willing to make your software go against your user will.
And that is enough to make it not trust worthy.

I hope at least that you will clearly state your political opinion and the consequences of it in the description of your software.

I will just leave it here:
https://play.google.com/about/privacy-security-deception/deceptive-behavior/

The free software philosophy likes giving freedom to the user.
I don't agree with the developers here and actually find it weird that they can do this.

Anyway, I don't think that any feedback will quickly undo these changes.
That said I don't think that commenting helps, it only makes others angry.

The whole bag of nonsense
What is a "public software"? Where did I (or maintainers) sign up doing whatever you want? Against whose will we are doing this (I know whose but I want you to think for yourself).
We are not the government. We are not the "public company". We don't owe anyone risking being banned just to host nazis. We are not censoring interacting with Gab, we don't want them to use our app (it's free software of course and what we can do is limited in this regard).
Fediverse cannot be censored by any single government or company. We also cannot censor them. We can refuse to provide convenience service for them. That's the least we can do.

Anyway, I should also stop responding to this thread. People think that we must do something, I say that we don't owe you anything.

@zyphlar - Yes, keeping in the rick roll while also clarifying why the user is being rickrolled would be an acceptable compromise.

That way you get the fun of dunking on Nazis while also making it abundantly clear to the user that this isn't a bug or something.

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

Irrelevant to this discussion.

I don't like either and I'm surprised how portraying Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and other communist dictators that were as bad as the nazi dictator as heroes and gods is allowed on general instances. To me, they might be on opposite sides but are equally retarded. However, to my surprise, promoting violence against humans and promoting human rights violation is fine when you're sided with them (I've seen examples of this behavior on my federated timeline, and some in GNU social).

Sounds like you found tankies. Who i really dont like. Most communists dont actually want dictatorship and if you blocked tankies you wouldnt hear any complaints out of me.

And most right wingers don't like Hitler either. If you want the right to stop lumping you in with Stalinists you might want to stop calling all of them Nazis as well. Just food for thought.

I dont call all right wing people nazis. But most of the people on gab are some form of fascist. Naziism is a form of fascism but fascism doesnt have to be naziism. Theres many forms of fascism.

I agree with you, "most people on Gab". Gab was created with free speech in mind, and unfortunately it was populated with extremists and gave them the neo-nazi fame.

I'd like to hear from the developers if they are willing to block Librem Social, because Purism said their instance is going to have little to moderation, and their instance also defends freedom of speech. Asking again, why not block other instances then, or, rephrasing, why does a CW and silence/ban suffice for other types of offensive stuff, but in this case the censoring of Gab is justified and suddenly CW and instance silences/user bans aren't effective?

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

Irrelevant to this discussion.

I don't like either and I'm surprised how portraying Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and other communist dictators that were as bad as the nazi dictator as heroes and gods is allowed on general instances. To me, they might be on opposite sides but are equally retarded. However, to my surprise, promoting violence against humans and promoting human rights violation is fine when you're sided with them (I've seen examples of this behavior on my federated timeline, and some in GNU social).

Sounds like you found tankies. Who i really dont like. Most communists dont actually want dictatorship and if you blocked tankies you wouldnt hear any complaints out of me.

And most right wingers don't like Hitler either. If you want the right to stop lumping you in with Stalinists you might want to stop calling all of them Nazis as well. Just food for thought.

I dont call all right wing people nazis. But most of the people on gab are some form of fascist. Naziism is a form of fascism but fascism doesnt have to be naziism. Theres many forms of fascism.

Ok, wasn't going to bring this up as it was mostly irrelevant, but I'll do it to make a point. I consider myself a moderate Republican. Yes I voted for Trump. Yes I believe in border security. I am Pro-Life and anti Gun Control. I also disagree with any kind of identity politics. Does that make me a fascist?

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

Irrelevant to this discussion.

I don't like either and I'm surprised how portraying Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and other communist dictators that were as bad as the nazi dictator as heroes and gods is allowed on general instances. To me, they might be on opposite sides but are equally retarded. However, to my surprise, promoting violence against humans and promoting human rights violation is fine when you're sided with them (I've seen examples of this behavior on my federated timeline, and some in GNU social).

Sounds like you found tankies. Who i really dont like. Most communists dont actually want dictatorship and if you blocked tankies you wouldnt hear any complaints out of me.

And most right wingers don't like Hitler either. If you want the right to stop lumping you in with Stalinists you might want to stop calling all of them Nazis as well. Just food for thought.

I dont call all right wing people nazis. But most of the people on gab are some form of fascist. Naziism is a form of fascism but fascism doesnt have to be naziism. Theres many forms of fascism.

Ok, wasn't going to bring this up as it was mostly irrelevant, but I'll do it to make a point. I consider myself a moderate Republican. Yes I voted for Trump. Yes I believe in border security. I am Pro-Life and anti Gun Control. I also disagree with any kind of identity politics. Does that make me a fascist?

https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html heres a good set of charactheristics of fascism

If you see yourself in some of these you might need to think about your ideals.

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

I dont know if anyone told you but uh theres lots of communists on mastodon, and we dont like nazis.

Irrelevant to this discussion.

I don't like either and I'm surprised how portraying Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and other communist dictators that were as bad as the nazi dictator as heroes and gods is allowed on general instances. To me, they might be on opposite sides but are equally retarded. However, to my surprise, promoting violence against humans and promoting human rights violation is fine when you're sided with them (I've seen examples of this behavior on my federated timeline, and some in GNU social).

Sounds like you found tankies. Who i really dont like. Most communists dont actually want dictatorship and if you blocked tankies you wouldnt hear any complaints out of me.

And most right wingers don't like Hitler either. If you want the right to stop lumping you in with Stalinists you might want to stop calling all of them Nazis as well. Just food for thought.

I dont call all right wing people nazis. But most of the people on gab are some form of fascist. Naziism is a form of fascism but fascism doesnt have to be naziism. Theres many forms of fascism.

Ok, wasn't going to bring this up as it was mostly irrelevant, but I'll do it to make a point. I consider myself a moderate Republican. Yes I voted for Trump. Yes I believe in border security. I am Pro-Life and anti Gun Control. I also disagree with any kind of identity politics. Does that make me a fascist?

https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html heres a good set of charactheristics of fascism

If you see yourself in some of these you might need to think about your ideals.

See, a Republican would find actions like what this app is proposing to be fascistic. Specifically, points 6 (controlling of what information is allowed to be seen), 9 (defaulting to megacorporations like Google and Twitter as arbiters of acceptable speech), and 3 (using "Nazis" as a scapegoat for any authoritarian actions taken in the name of "protecting the userbase.")

Gab openly admits to hosting a lot of fascists though. Thats the difference.

Gab openly admits to hosting a lot of fascists though. Thats the difference.

Because gab doesn't believe in censorship in any form. Yes, fascists can post there. So can Communists, Radical Environmentalists, Centrists, anybody, really. They use US law as their basis for posting guidelines. If it's legal to yell it in the streets it's legal to post on gab. No, they don't censor fascists. They don't censor anybody.

Gab openly admits to hosting a lot of fascists though. Thats the difference.

Because gab doesn't believe in censorship in any form. Yes, fascists can post there. So can Communists, Radical Environmentalists, Centrists, anybody, really. They use US law as their basis for posting guidelines. If it's legal to yell it in the streets it's legal to post on gab. No, they don't censor fascists. They don't censor anybody.

And thats why its mostly fascists and not full of diverse views. Its the paradox of tolerance proving itself. If you want diverse views you have to exclude fascists so they dont drive everyone else off. Any open society has to not tolerate the intolerant to remain open.

Gab openly admits to hosting a lot of fascists though. Thats the difference.

Because gab doesn't believe in censorship in any form. Yes, fascists can post there. So can Communists, Radical Environmentalists, Centrists, anybody, really. They use US law as their basis for posting guidelines. If it's legal to yell it in the streets it's legal to post on gab. No, they don't censor fascists. They don't censor anybody.

And thats why its mostly fascists and not full of diverse views. Its the paradox of tolerance proving itself. If you want diverse views you have to exclude fascists so they dont drive everyone else off. Any open society has to not tolerate the intolerant to remain open.

And see, I don't hold to that view. Neither does the US Supreme Court.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.30f99390a687
Censorship, or whatever you want to call it in a private context, always fails. Someone just has to get through it one time and that idea is out there forever. I want to hear what Fascists have to say. Just like I want to hear what Communists have to say. I have a right to hear all points of view and make up my own mind about things. So do you and everyone else.

Gab openly admits to hosting a lot of fascists though. Thats the difference.

Because gab doesn't believe in censorship in any form. Yes, fascists can post there. So can Communists, Radical Environmentalists, Centrists, anybody, really. They use US law as their basis for posting guidelines. If it's legal to yell it in the streets it's legal to post on gab. No, they don't censor fascists. They don't censor anybody.

And thats why its mostly fascists and not full of diverse views. Its the paradox of tolerance proving itself. If you want diverse views you have to exclude fascists so they dont drive everyone else off. Any open society has to not tolerate the intolerant to remain open.

And see, I don't hold to that view. Neither does the US Supreme Court.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.30f99390a687
Censorship, or whatever you want to call it in a private context, always fails. Someone just has to get through it one time and that idea is out there forever. I want to hear what Fascists have to say. Just like I want to hear what Communists have to say. I have a right to hear all points of view and make up my own mind about things. So do you and everyone else.

I keep telling you all that the first amendment protects you from the government, not private citizens. Please pay attention as there will be a quiz at the end.

If deplatforming didnt work then fascists wouldnt care when its done to them, but they do because it reduces their reach. It works.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/5/18125507/milo-yiannopoulos-debt-no-platform
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/bjbp9d/do-social-media-bans-work

Gab openly admits to hosting a lot of fascists though. Thats the difference.

Because gab doesn't believe in censorship in any form. Yes, fascists can post there. So can Communists, Radical Environmentalists, Centrists, anybody, really. They use US law as their basis for posting guidelines. If it's legal to yell it in the streets it's legal to post on gab. No, they don't censor fascists. They don't censor anybody.

And thats why its mostly fascists and not full of diverse views. Its the paradox of tolerance proving itself. If you want diverse views you have to exclude fascists so they dont drive everyone else off. Any open society has to not tolerate the intolerant to remain open.

And see, I don't hold to that view. Neither does the US Supreme Court.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.30f99390a687
Censorship, or whatever you want to call it in a private context, always fails. Someone just has to get through it one time and that idea is out there forever. I want to hear what Fascists have to say. Just like I want to hear what Communists have to say. I have a right to hear all points of view and make up my own mind about things. So do you and everyone else.

I keep telling you all that the first amendment protects you from the government, not private citizens. Please pay attention as there will be a quiz at the end.

If deplatforming didnt work then fascists wouldnt care when its done to them, but they do because it reduces their reach. It works.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/5/18125507/milo-yiannopoulos-debt-no-platform
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/bjbp9d/do-social-media-bans-work

How many Neo Nazis were there in America in the 1990s? I would wager a lot less than there are now. In the early days of the internet they were there, but mostly just laughed at. Now you have stuff like this happening.
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/o-t-lounge/a-dangerous-new-trend-has-emerged-among-americas-generation-z-the-swastika-pose/83640111/
I also disagree that free speech only applies to the government. In California, for example, private businesses like shopping malls are required to allow religious groups access. When you set yourself up as a public forum, which all social media does, you are bound by the rules. Otherwise you lose your safe harbor provisions and are legally responsible for anything posted by anyone on your platform.
See the Communications Decency Act, section 230.
I also vehemently disagree that people you politically disagree with should be deplatformed and blacklisted. We tried that in the 50s with McCarthyism. It didn't work then, it won't work now.

Fascism is on the rise because they exploited the ideology you are promoting right now to gain new recruits. They kept getting platformed. This let them spread their message without opposition.

During world war two there was a particularly nasty bit of nazi propaganda called protocols of the elders of zion, many academics, newspapers and others debunked its claims over and over and it did absolutely no good in stopping its spread and it did no good in stopping people from believing it. At the end its distribution had to be limited to stop the spread of it, and it worked.

Trying to liken deplatforming fascists with the red scare that primarily targeted gay and lesbian people in the name of "anti-commuinism" is an argument thats not going to work with me, a gay trans communist.

It also did until dammage to the labor movement, harmed the civil rights movement and more. Quite frankly it ruined a lot of lives and broke a number of organizations trying to work against oppression. So yeah it actually wound up doing what it set out to do and the effects of the red scare are felt still today.

GeorgeSears "joined 3 hours ago." So are you just here to defend your Gab account or what?

Very easy to bypass by using any URL shortener service.
That's one of the very few good points in this thread - we don't support redirects for authentication, do we?

@Tak we should check and disable it then. Doesn't make any sense in normal case I believe

@Tak @charlag URL shorteners won't work with Tusky in this context, as it expects a domain, not a path, in the input box:

@mlc You could just use a proxy for Tusky, although if this actually gets through why wouldn't you just use another app like Fedilab or Librem Social

@kakolisgay I don't see how proxy would help.
Fedilab blocks Gab already and Librem app works only with (surprise, surprise) Librem One server

@charlag Change the DNS in proxy settings to make gabsomethinge.wew proxy through to gab, it's not hard to do. Even if your PR is justified it's useless and easily defeated, and there's not much you can do to fix it

Fedilab blocks Gab already

Wasn't able to confirm that until you reminded me, guess thats another client in the garbage

@kakolisgay let's see how many people can jump through such hoops.

@charlag I'd be willing to write an easy to use bypass just to fuck you over if you'd like

Librem One also got defederated en mass by a lot of the fedverse because they allow nazis. Its almost like theres a strong anti-fascist element in the fedverse itself and were going to use every possible means to hamper and hinder fascists from gaining space here. Take the hint and go back to 4chan.

@Laurelai Only fascists are willing to stoop as low as to silence their opposition from even speaking, stop projecting.

@Laurelai Only fascists are willing to stoop as low as to silence their opposition from even speaking, stop projecting.

Says the guy literally trying to give admitted fascists a platform to spread fascism. But keep posting cringe i find your tears delicious.

@Laurelai The "fascists" already have a platform and seem to be happy with it, but god forbid they provide support for masterdon clients oh no they'll be able to use the free clients to talk on the same platform. How horrific

Also don't strawman an argument it makes you look bad

@Laurelai The "fascists" already have a platform and seem to be happy with it, but god forbid they provide support for masterdon clients oh no they'll be able to use the free clients to talk on the same platform. How horrific

Also don't strawman an argument it makes you look bad

If they already have a platform why do they want ours so badly? They should just use their own app. All those arguments yall made saying how its cenorship and it wont work should apply to gabs app that got delisted too right? Go use that one. Go prove how much blocking the app from the app store wont help.

Go on.

Im waiting.

Oh. You still want ours. I see. Almost like your arguments are 100% dishonest and you want to take something from someone else. You know this is fucking you side over. You know it. I know it. Stop pretending otherwise.

@Laurelai The "fascists" already have a platform and seem to be happy with it, but god forbid they provide support for masterdon clients oh no they'll be able to use the free clients to talk on the same platform. How horrific

Also don't strawman an argument it makes you look bad

Yeah no, I don't think you know what a stawman argument is. Shockingly the guy with a JonTron avatar is a literal man child. Never would've seen that coming.

@Laurelai

If they already have a platform why do they want ours so badly?

Gab isn't going to federate, they don't want "your" platform

They should just use their own app. All those arguments yall made saying how its cenorship and it wont work should apply to gabs app that got delisted too right? Go use that one. Go prove how much blocking the app from the app store wont help.

Continuing to attack gab is only going to give them free publicity, this entire ordeal is exclusively to gabs favor. Banning them from the stores helped them and this is going to aswell. If you want gab to disappear just ignore them, although that's like asking a moth to not fly towards light so whats the point in even saying that

Oh. You still want ours. I see. Almost like your arguments are 100% dishonest and you want to take something from someone else.

How have I been dishonest?

You know this is fucking you side over. You know it. I know it. Stop pretending otherwise.

My side? What side do you think I'm on?

I'm sorry folks but I'm locking it down for now. We are people with our lives and we have things to do besides moderating this thread. We've heard a lot of things, some of them are valid. We will unlock it once we are ready to process it. Thanks for understanding.