in a nutshell, it's about autonomy. it's about social media autonomy for every person on the planet. all 7.6 billion of us. nobody else telling us to do, what to say, and nobody else forcing us to see things we don't want to see.
this means Pleroma is being built for an entirely new scale of fediverse: one with billions of nodes. it's also why Pleroma supports alternative transports such as TOR and I2P out of the box.
it also is a major differentiator between Pleroma and Mastodon. in the Mastodon model, there's maybe a few million islands which host a few thousand people each. to contrast, in our model, everyone who wants to host their own instance does so. that means everyone can choose to have total social media freedom.
but it's not just social media, we also intend to use the same underlying tech to enable real-time communications with the same capabilities as the social media side of things.
and it's universal: different frontends for different preferences. like Mastodon but don't have the resources to run it? use Pleroma with Mastodon frontend and apps. like GNU social? Pleroma's default frontend was modelled after it. like diaspora* but want to talk to your fediverse friends? use Feather. like the alternative Mastodon frontends like Pinafore and Brutaldon? they work too.
hate spam and harrassment? we have a mostly as yet untapped framework called MRF which can be leveraged to automate moderation of an instance.
want to modify it? drop by #pleroma on freenode and we help with that too.
@Elizafox I'm so sorry that you had the misfortune of "knowing" a Nazi in the sense that you knew he was 4.6". I suppose that such a characteristic could give a guy a complex in certain toxic environments though.
But there is always can be too much of a good thing. At some point debating with oppressors becomes hazardous because it lends their oppressive ideas visibility and the appearance of legitimacy.
You unwittingly build for them the platform they seek.
@Elizafox ...if some nut job insists on defending oppression or coercion and is quite obviously not interested in rational debate nobody should be forced to endure such speech. I won't darken their door, nor let them on my house, or on my server, or deal with such trash.
And I don't at all see how that means I'm "not really libertarian leaning" .
@Elizafox you know, I consider myself "libertarian leaning", but mentioning that comes with the hazard of attracting some awful "freeze peach" types.
Maybe I have a funny idea of what libertarian means...or maybe they do...don't know.
I see the root word "liberty" and consider such ideals as the defence of personal liberties against ANY oppression or coercion, not just big government. Yes, that includes some forms of speech...
@Elizafox@Dekken Personally I think it would be ideal if governments could stay out of people's personal transactions. That said idealism is to politics what the "spherical cow" is to high school physics tests.
*ideally* everyone would hold some degree of libertarian values and would recognize that the gender preferences of home buyers are their rights and not relevant to the transaction.
But, you know, bigots ruin the party for everyone.
@Dekken@Elizafox Sounds like this congresscritter is trying to be "Republitarian"...try to get votes from fundamentalist/evangelical Christian Republicans with the message" I defend your rights" and (pseudo) libertarians with the message "government shouldn't tell you who you can and cannot sell your property to" at the same time...which is awful really.
What would his response be if it was a single mum, or a Christian, or a Mexican whose offer was refused?