So, I've been thinking about this for a few days now, ever since the really big influx of Twitter migrants started, but the reification of Cohost as a guaranteed safe space is one that makes me a little uneasy? It's good that we're calling out toxic behaviours and attempting to refrain from them, but Cohost isn't inherently safer than any other social media site. Preserving the existing relaxed culture is a good thing that I've pushed for, but we need to keep in mind that it's not because it was here first, (if the culture on Cohost were aggressive and petty before the Twitter users came, I'd be welcoming attempts to change the culture of the site,) it's because it's healthier and more compassionate, thanks to a directed effort to make it so. This kind of safety and kindness is something that requires constant effort; acting in good faith is difficult, while acting in bad faith is easy.
It's certainly easier to act in good faith on Cohost than on Twitter, thanks to design differences and a lack of an algorithm, but I'm still a little concerned with the idea of lionizing the website as inherently good-faith. We should remain critical (as in critical thinking, not as in criticism) of every space we enter, both on- and offline. Good faith action and safety aren't just always giving the benefit of the doubt, it also involves being willing to ask pointed questions when called for. I trust @staff, because they've done a pretty good job so far, and so I'm willing, when needed, to go to bat for them against bad-faith action. But that trust is predicated on their actions; it's earned, not owed.
This turned into a bit of a ramble, but I hope I've gotten my point across? Safe spaces are not inherently so, and we need to work to keep them so.
i think this is important
the two things i would push for in a "culture" here if there is one, given what i've seen, are:
- intentional actions to improve the space
- avoiding toxic positivity - don't just be happy and positive at all costs
i think i've reposted at least one post along the lines of the latter, and this touches on the former nicely
I think the hard truth is that people don't want to talk about ideological basis: "Toxic positivity", for instance, doesn't exist in a vacuum, it has a specific ideological basis that stems from liberalism; don't talk about real harms, don't challenge the status quo, etc. It's not a vibe we want to preserve but a specific culture with specific ideological components, ostensibly anti-racist, anti-bigotry, anti-fascist and a culture of mutual support and kindness. If you look at it from this angle there's no difference between enforced "good vibes only" and the nazi bar rule: It's engendering fascism.
The upshot is that byzantine rules and aggressive posts on "how to post on Eggbug" will not help and do not address the issue (viz. Mastodon). We collectively make this an unsafe space for fascism and, at least to a greater extent, liberalism or we can expect things to eventually go the same route every other social media site does.
The upshot is that byzantine rules and aggressive posts on "how to post on Eggbug" will not help and do not address the issue (viz. Mastodon)
This specific aspect of Mastodon bothers me so much
