the real name of this app in chinese is "Little Red Book"
surprised?
this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
95 points (84.2% liked)
Casual Conversation
2045 readers
229 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
One of the most cringe things I've ever read.
Well you’re just rude.
This is it. Self hosting, federation, not for profit is the way. We need an internet that is made by just regular people for no better reason than it's fun. Not just social media either. We need an entire open internet, free and clear of all ulterior motives (or more likely still having bad actors mixed in, but at least they're not pulling any strings at the upper levels).
I don't know how possible that is, but I know we need it.
Fully agree! Thanks for putting my thought into much better words.
The only issue I see now is how to surpass bad mods and admins? The balance between filtering off topic or bad content versus anything goes but then nazis come out seems to be a challenge plus power tripping.
That's a never-ending process of everyone voting and discussing where the line is and where it should be.
There is no "final" solution, instead the solution is for people to collectively and continiously keep solving it every day.
I just don't understand why it's a problem that the nazis come out. Would we not rather they utter their opinions in the open so they can be refuted? That way people can also just ignore that user if they don't like viewing what he has to say.
It's not like they don't exist just because we ban them here.. They'll go somewhere to discuss where only other people who agree with them is allowed to be.
Unless we're talking direct threats or doxing I'm always an advocate for free speech online.
I used to think this way, but no. Nazis should be shunned and banned and feel unwelcome everywhere. No one should ever think their rhetoric is harmless or ignorable. Those who tolerate Nazis enable them.
And yeah, folks can wring their hands about slippery slopes and where we draw lines, but the beauty of federation is that if someone is too loose or too draconian, we can go somewhere with more agreeable policies. We can decide as a society where the line is drawn, and it'll be fuzzy but as speech gets closer to Naziism, it will be rejected more and more places, as it should be.
Well said
load more comments
(5 replies)
China is pretty sensitive about depictions of Mao, so it doesn't surprise me.
Ironically enough it's actually super popular in China to "Rent-a-Mao" or Chiang Kai-Shek or whoever else from China's modern history. There are a lot of Mao impersonators, just like we have impersonators of Elvis.
Even positive ones? But what's up with that?
It’s largely cultural. China is a place where filial piety is import so anything that can be construed as disrespect for your forbearers is looked down upon.
It's like how companies don't like satirical use of their trademarks even if positive. Brand control. Or for China, propaganda control. They don't want you to get comfortable using jokes about it.
Surprising to me too, it was a positive depiction of Mao.
I'm not really sure, it may be to do with how Jiang Zemin got called toad boy a lot.
load more comments
(1 replies)