JackbyDev

You'd have to show who specifically was yelling. You see everyone from all instances they're federated with. They might not have even been from Lemmy.world.

Edit: Case in point, I'm from programming.dev

I think you're drastically underestimating how even small steps like that can tune a ton of people out. If they're only sort of on the fence about it it might be enough to make it not worth it. Or maybe they'll think they'll check later but never get around to it.

but no one wants nor expects to have to do significant research and make a decision about how they want to interact with a social media site before they've even started using it.

Then just directly recommend specific, general purpose instances to people.

How do you know your accounts weren't part of a ban wave? It doesn't necessarily mean they linked them through your phone.

There is a certain type of whataboutism where people are just super eager to remind people that "well, actually, white people were slaves too" when referring to slavery in America. It's likely why they appear to be more on guard about what you're saying.

But if you're going to get rid of the two holidays and only have one and celebrate it on MLK day, why not just call it MLK day instead of insisting on still celebrating Lee? Hell, it's almost worse the more I think about it. If they had some random holiday that celebrated Lee and kept it around mostly just to get a day off you might have a point.

"It's like ham and hamster. Totally unrelated. But that's just JavaScript, other BlahScripts are related. There was this crazy advertising push for Java back in the '90s that they took advantage of for name recognition."

Still a very succinct and straightforward explanation.

This just gave me the (shit post) idea of an app where VC funders can swipe on projects they want to invest in or not

It doesn't have to be the whole explanation. It's not like you get a singular sentence to talk to someone lol.

I'm not splitting a hair, I'm just telling you I don't feel that strongly about it because I'm not the one who made it. I'd never heard it before.

Look, I genuinely get what your saying, and I'm not saying people should be allowed to say whatever they want on Twitter. I'm certainly not saying the first amendment protects them. I'm just saying a lot of forms of online communication are critical in today's society.

Like, if I got banned from Twitter for saying I dislike Elon Musk, does that sound okay? I know it's currently legal, I'm not saying it isn't. But it certainly feels like an unjust restriction of my speech. Not "free speech" in the protected first amendment sense, but certainly "free speech" in the sense that people should generally be allowed to say things. The response of "just build your own website and you can say what you want" is missing the point of the reach and power massive websites have. When people say "big tech restricts free speech" this is the sort of thing they're trying to get at, but it sounds wrong because "free speech" is a pretty loaded and ambiguous term. Treating everyone saying free speech as if they mean something about the first amendment feels disingenuous to me.

And again, let me be perfectly clear, I'm not trying to insinuate that everyone should just get free reign to post whatever hateful content or misinformation they want wherever they want. I'm just saying that private companies being able to silence you on a global scale with no recourse or way to protest it feels very wrong. I don't have a solution and don't know where the line should be, but corporations shouldn't just be able to gag people arbitrarily.

Your hamster analogy falls apart here because it only describes an exception, not a rule.

It's not my analogy.