It’s too bad but

No one is talking about the Piefed vote quotas anymore, so you’re welcome.

More than once I brought this up as comparison on the difference between an unpopular default based on the main developer’s needs, that was announced and detailed in changelogs, that can be toggled and worked around, instead of a control-freak’s grudges manifesting as a hidden shadowban list. We lost a very friendly power user (PugJesus) from the Piefed change, but unfortunately sometimes that is the price of it.

Wanting a less-toxic fediverse is a totally normal thing, users and admins have many of the tools already for that, and I respect devs for trying to do their part. But it is the dishonest way of implementing it that no one is a fan of, and that makes everyone question this dev’s character. If this person could at the very least own up to it, call it well-intentioned error, and respond to the problem with solutions rather than a crashout, then this wouldn’t need to be as big of a deal.

harassing-anyone-who-doesn’t-fall-in-line

Lemmy is bandwagony but in politics you have to live with a little bit of it. I’ve said anti- and pro-feminist stuff, made anti- and pro-trans arguments while trying to be empathetic as I can, made cold, warm and hot takes, toed the line and went against the grain, got lots of up and down votes. I try to pushback against gatekeeping and purity tests, play devil’s advocate, and when I’m not shitposting, try to steelman arguments I don’t agree with. People are imperfect, I try to avoid to assign guilt by association, people will think differently about things than I do, I respect their opinions while still disagree with, and I’ll take downvotes on the chin for defending different that.