• cassie 🐺
    link
    fedilink
    English
    119 months ago

    To be fair, Bluesky does have “blocklists” maintained by other users that you can opt into, and quite a few popular ones exist with active maintainers who take and act on reports pretty quickly. So you still can delegate moderation responsibilities. One advantage to this is that you can opt into a few blocklists based on what you personally want to block - separate lists exist for hateful bigots, crypto pushers, and so on. I gave it a shot out of curiosity and haven’t run into any issues yet, but that’s just me.

    I still prefer Mastodon for broader AP integration, and I think blocklists aren’t discoverable enough outside of word of mouth, but I am curious to see how that turns out for Bluesky. Certainly an improvement over Xitter imo.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      19 months ago

      That still requires the user to do something actively to get a moderated feed. Most users don’t want to deal with that.

      • @Plopp
        link
        English
        79 months ago

        But on Mastodon the user has to dig through a bunch of instances to find one that filters out what they don’t want to see, and figure out if it’s an instance worth joining for other reasons. I’d argue there’s probably more work to join Mastodon than to join Bluesky and filter your feed. But I don’t use Bluesky so I don’t know.

      • @ArghZombies
        link
        English
        39 months ago

        This is pretty standard online though - even regular Google has settings like “Safe Search:On” that you can toggle to moderate your search results.

        It really just depends on what the default settings are when you arrive at a service before you start using it, and how obvious and discoverable you make those settings controls.