Ok, so the MC gets iskei’d into their own Mary Sue story, but as the villainess… now I really want to know if the author based it on something they wrote in middle school!

I thought Frieren was still better at suppressing her mana.

Although, Frieren did state in an earlier episode that Fern was faster at getting off spells, which would definitely be an advantage here.

Here is some previous discussion on whether to defederate from them due to worries about their moderation capacity (and how it leads to spam/etc): https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/1671319

So far, it seems that most of the spam etc isn’t making it through to people, which is great! It means we can keep things going as they are without it impacting people too much. Please use this thread to let me know if that changes though

This is such a shitty way to frame it.

I think folk should default to neutral pronouns, especially in trans safe spaces. But phrasing a failure to do so it as “misgendering trans people” is jumping straight to the most absolute bad-faith interpretation.

Then further, saying that anyone who does it is “a transphobe” is way off base. (It reminds me of Contrapoint’s bit about essentialism)

It’s also notable to me that you’re not asking for e.g. any change of policy here. You’re not trying to improve the way this instance is run to discourage folk from using masculine defaults.

You’re using this incident only to wage war against someone you were already in conflict with, and assuming that anyone who steps in and criticizes your behavior is taking sides in that conflict.

I can’t think of anything less trans-friendly than mandatory pronoun marking.

I quite liked this quote from Isabel Fall (more about identity than pronouns specifically, but still related!)

“We make boxes that seem to enclose a satisfying number of human experiences, and then we put labels on those and argue about them instead,” she says. “The boxes change over time, according to a process which is governed by, as far as I can tell, cycles of human suffering: We realize that forcing people into the last set of boxes was painful and wrong, we wring our hands, we fold up some new boxes and assure ourselves that this time we got it right, or at least right enough for now. Because we need the boxes to argue over. I do not want to be in a box. I want to sift through your fingers, to vanish, to be unseen.”

They’ve merged a fix for an additional cause of this now, PR#3428

The issue fixed there is that posts older than 1 week weren’t getting their scores recalculated except on startup. I’m not entirely clear on whether that would explain all the instances of this I’ve seen on blahaj, but I guess in time we’ll see?

I imagine the vast majority are well-meaning people who just don’t really understand federation well yet and don’t understand they’re commenting on a totally different instance’s internal matter.

I wonder if the community id !main itself is causing some confusion? If this keeps on coming up, maybe moving meta to a more obvious name might work.

If I’m following their issues correctly:

• 3131 was for tracking the original issue that they believed was fixed
• 3428 describes some similar ongoing issues with hot since 0.18. (not sure if that applies to active as well)

Don’t federate with that instance if you don’t like its views.

TBH, I find even this view kind of… foreign? It makes sense to defederate from instances that cause harm to the ecosystem (whether by hosting trolls or not guarding against spam) but I just don’t think that “federation” should indicate “approval” in the way so many folk clearly do. Like, letting someone on gmail email me doesn’t mean I approve of what google does.