The only reason infosec
-
The only reason infosec.exchange isn't defederated is from grapheneos.social is because it's too big to fail.
infosec.exchange has very consistently failed to address rampant libel and harassment directed towards our team from their instance.
At one point, the admin of the instance publicly posted we'd reported harassment with details and asked for feedback which acted as a rallying cry for people engaged in these attacks. None was addressed. We stopped filing reports of harassment to them.
@GrapheneOS federation social media failed and you are prime example of it. You see libel and harassment everywhere and you want to isolate almost from everyone.
Fediverse is a bunch of servers that claim they want to communicate with others, but use defederation banlists or shadow bans to remove anyone with different views.
This results in bunch of small isolated bubbles moderated by people with extremist views, where it is impossible to follow everybody you want to follow. -
@GrapheneOS federation social media failed and you are prime example of it. You see libel and harassment everywhere and you want to isolate almost from everyone.
Fediverse is a bunch of servers that claim they want to communicate with others, but use defederation banlists or shadow bans to remove anyone with different views.
This results in bunch of small isolated bubbles moderated by people with extremist views, where it is impossible to follow everybody you want to follow.@RyszardD infosec.exchange has a massive instance blocklist far larger than ours. The admin of the instance responded to a valid report about someone calling our founder insane and delusional clearly in reference in harassment content by publicly posting about it asking for input and then being supportive of people linking harassment content. He also leaked our private messages to the person we reported. We want those nasty replies removed and for them to be asked to stop, that's all.
-
@RyszardD infosec.exchange has a massive instance blocklist far larger than ours. The admin of the instance responded to a valid report about someone calling our founder insane and delusional clearly in reference in harassment content by publicly posting about it asking for input and then being supportive of people linking harassment content. He also leaked our private messages to the person we reported. We want those nasty replies removed and for them to be asked to stop, that's all.
@GrapheneOS "someone calling our founder insane and delusional".
1. That is just a stupid opinion, not harassment. It's very mild. Just ignore it. It's not a valid report of harassment.
2. Everybody knows that it's you Daniel, you write most of the stuff using the main gos accounts.
3. Most of this stupid opinions would go unnoticed, but you boost it by responding to it and creating drama.
-
The only reason infosec.exchange isn't defederated is from grapheneos.social is because it's too big to fail.
infosec.exchange has very consistently failed to address rampant libel and harassment directed towards our team from their instance.
At one point, the admin of the instance publicly posted we'd reported harassment with details and asked for feedback which acted as a rallying cry for people engaged in these attacks. None was addressed. We stopped filing reports of harassment to them.
This part is what really gets me:
> At one point, the admin of the instance publicly posted we'd reported harassment with details and asked for feedback which acted as a rallying cry for people engaged in these attacks. None was addressed. We stopped filing reports of harassment to them.
It was by design. That's just who the admin of infosec.exchange is.
-
@GrapheneOS "someone calling our founder insane and delusional".
1. That is just a stupid opinion, not harassment. It's very mild. Just ignore it. It's not a valid report of harassment.
2. Everybody knows that it's you Daniel, you write most of the stuff using the main gos accounts.
3. Most of this stupid opinions would go unnoticed, but you boost it by responding to it and creating drama.
@RyszardD It is harassment and infosec.exchange defederates instances for permitting much less than that. It's part a bunch of libel and harassment directed towards us from their instance and elsewhere. Reporting one case of it led to the admin of the instance publicizing it and taking feedback which involved people sharing a bunch of fabricated stories and harassment content. The moderation action they claimed to take was actually undone and our private DMs were leaked to the person doing it.
-
The only reason infosec.exchange isn't defederated is from grapheneos.social is because it's too big to fail.
infosec.exchange has very consistently failed to address rampant libel and harassment directed towards our team from their instance.
At one point, the admin of the instance publicly posted we'd reported harassment with details and asked for feedback which acted as a rallying cry for people engaged in these attacks. None was addressed. We stopped filing reports of harassment to them.
Due to the public post requesting feedback which was being heavily brigaded, we had to intervene and provide context. We sent most of this in private messages linking to the harassment content being referenced.
We just wanted the nasty posts removed and the person we reported asked to stop doing it. Instead it was turned into a public furor towards us for people involved in this to brigade and our private messages to infosec.exchange explaining the situation and providing context were leaked.
-
The only reason infosec.exchange isn't defederated is from grapheneos.social is because it's too big to fail.
infosec.exchange has very consistently failed to address rampant libel and harassment directed towards our team from their instance.
At one point, the admin of the instance publicly posted we'd reported harassment with details and asked for feedback which acted as a rallying cry for people engaged in these attacks. None was addressed. We stopped filing reports of harassment to them.
@GrapheneOS I've blocked the entire instance at a cost to my professional / career. You can do it, too. I believe in you.
-
@GrapheneOS I've blocked the entire instance at a cost to my professional / career. You can do it, too. I believe in you.
@holsta @GrapheneOS Agreed.
-
Due to the public post requesting feedback which was being heavily brigaded, we had to intervene and provide context. We sent most of this in private messages linking to the harassment content being referenced.
We just wanted the nasty posts removed and the person we reported asked to stop doing it. Instead it was turned into a public furor towards us for people involved in this to brigade and our private messages to infosec.exchange explaining the situation and providing context were leaked.
@GrapheneOS i found this move from @jerry unacceptable.
-
@GrapheneOS I've blocked the entire instance at a cost to my professional / career. You can do it, too. I believe in you.
@holsta @GrapheneOS Makes sense. I’ve found that infosec.exchange hosts a very large number of insufferable know-it-alls. I’ve blocked many of them.
-
The only reason infosec.exchange isn't defederated is from grapheneos.social is because it's too big to fail.
infosec.exchange has very consistently failed to address rampant libel and harassment directed towards our team from their instance.
At one point, the admin of the instance publicly posted we'd reported harassment with details and asked for feedback which acted as a rallying cry for people engaged in these attacks. None was addressed. We stopped filing reports of harassment to them.
@GrapheneOS For what it’s worth, I am a GrapheneOS user and I recommend it to Android users.
-
@GrapheneOS
you cant defend yourself against criticism especially when it's many to one its best to just continue to be proactive in your own space@fluttersh@pony.social @GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social
So you prefer instances for each topic that "defend" their own social media bubble, e. g. instances for political parties, companies, crypto, climate and AI? -
@fluttersh@pony.social @GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social
So you prefer instances for each topic that "defend" their own social media bubble, e. g. instances for political parties, companies, crypto, climate and AI?@linuxusergd @GrapheneOS we have our own preferences with respect to the individual that holds those preferences we can either agree or disagree... tbf tho most infosec ppl are feds
-
@GrapheneOS federation social media failed and you are prime example of it. You see libel and harassment everywhere and you want to isolate almost from everyone.
Fediverse is a bunch of servers that claim they want to communicate with others, but use defederation banlists or shadow bans to remove anyone with different views.
This results in bunch of small isolated bubbles moderated by people with extremist views, where it is impossible to follow everybody you want to follow.You wrongfully claim GrapheneOS is guilty of this, but you just perfectly described infosec.exchange (see screenshots).
The admin of infosec.exchange hides so many users and post, that this thread with all the replies within are missing when viewed from infosec.exchange.
You cannot even see your post from infosec.exchange
The problem is not GrapheneOS.
#Mastodon #Misskey #Fediverse #ActivityPub
-
The only reason infosec.exchange isn't defederated is from grapheneos.social is because it's too big to fail.
infosec.exchange has very consistently failed to address rampant libel and harassment directed towards our team from their instance.
At one point, the admin of the instance publicly posted we'd reported harassment with details and asked for feedback which acted as a rallying cry for people engaged in these attacks. None was addressed. We stopped filing reports of harassment to them.
@GrapheneOS Any alternative instances you can recommend? cyberplace.social? defcon.social?
