Thank you @eprodrom for your thoughtful answers. Indeed, in the first weeks of the SocialHub, we worked hard to figure out who was “everyone” we wanted to see here, and we ended up adding the SocialHub Community Values Policy on top of the W3C CoC because we thought the professional one was insufficient for people who embraced the Fediverse because of the toxicity of commercial platforms, such as the dominant one whose boss famously said about its users: “Dumb fucks, they trust me” and that’s a current sponsor of the SWF.
Flags here are not to censor political content
Flags are not to silence political content, BTW. People have the right to be unhappy about surveillance capitalism, global surveillance, rigged political influence, deceptive patterns, racism, misogyny and all forms of bigotry, labor exploitation, and all other criticism of Mata and its allies in or out of the Fediverse, and to express it freely. You can’t use flags here to silence such opinions, therefore I rejected your flags.
Actually, the more you’re pushing against political content to massage your sponsor, that everyone else is unhappy about[1], the stronger we’ll push back.
That’s for the consistency part. And this is how I understand the SocialHub: political, and engaged for decentralization and against Big Tech.
I must say, as a personal comment, that I’m very disappointed with an effort to “make the Fediverse bigger and better” with the help of Mata or not, because bigger is not a goal, and better is obviously not a common understanding. ↩︎