This post is not only to try finding the best Mastodon instance/server but I also wanted to express about the Mastodon instances.
Most of Mastodon servers are apparently harsh about other instances that include things they don't like and are quite serious about getting those Internet points putting how the place isn't welcome for "bigotry" and is for everyone and so diverse, and I wouldn't have any problems with this if this wasn't frequently used by people who will try to shut you if they disagree enough with you and will try to present themselves as so virtuous.
You'd expect that the free side of the Internet would have people that value freedom and should let anything that isn't a crime or something that prejudice the instance itself or whatever space they're in but it seems this vision is getting far from the reality with time.
I find this a very odd take... You are free to say whatever you want, however people are also free to not listen to you. Why is the freedom to not listen seen as a "lesser" freedom than the freedom to say what you want?
The main benefit of federation like Mastodon and Lemmy is that if you and like-minded people in your community don't wish to listen to vitriol being spewed then you don't have to. Don't like it? Go and find an instance that does tolerate it and does want to listen.
The thing is that instances are not the individuals themselves but spaces for individuals. Sure the instances are driven by people but as they are publicly available and are tools for the communication of people and are susceptible to a different set of ethics; while you as an individual can just ignore people that think differently from you, restricting a tool/product from someone cause they think differently is and has to be seen as dumb and bad. I know the federated Internet is the best thing to freedom, otherwise I would've bought the Twitter premium thing and dyed my hair blue to bully people all day in there. However, the fact that people join the libre Internet, not only hate freedom for other people but also want to isolate people that believe the individual should be free from the major part of the FREE Internet just seems stupid to me.
counterpoint: you’re FREE to simply start your own instance and run it how you like? who are you to demand (or even to criticize) others for running an instance according to their own ethics and standards simply because you disagree, especially when you are free to run one by your own? do they not have the same freedom to do so as do you?
If I should be restricted to not criticize the instance then why are you criticizing me? I'm a smaller unit than the instances so according to you I weren't supposed to be able to be criticized.
how did I criticize you by asking you to explain your logic?
in what way is that true if you have the same ability to create your instance with your own rules and standards?
and you still haven’t answered my question: who are you to demand (or even to criticize) others for running an instance according to their own ethics and standards simply because you disagree, especially when you are free to run one by your own?
You talk like I can answer you before you've posted the text. Also, you saying I can't criticize an instance for their decisions for whatever reason is still quite of criticizing (despite making no sense but okay).
I’m not “talking like” anything, nor am I criticizing you— I simply asked you questions which you seem to be unable to or refusing to answer— and claiming to be incapable of comprehending.
You literally sent in the same message a question and said I'm refusing to answer your question, in the same message.
you’re blaming me because I pointed out that you refused to answer a question and asked you again? seriously?
by the way… who are you to demand (or even to criticize) others for running an instance according to their own ethics and standards simply because you disagree, especially when you are free to run one by your own?
You were not explaining a meaningless question so I couldn't answer so you needed another guy to explain what he thought you were saying so I could answer your question that you still doesn't wanna explain with your own words. Else you were trying to trick me into answering a question that couldn't be efficiently answered, you lack the capacity of explaining further or you dropped your text before thinking out of a emotional explosion.
Then who are you to criticize anyone? I don't believe you're god and every human has the same value so why should you be able to criticize others while others can't criticize anything?
I explained everything you asked me to. You intellectual failures are not my responsibility. You refusal to even acknowledge the questions I asked are nobody’s fault but your own. Accusing me of trickery? Just because you don’t comprehend the question? That’s just an excuse because you can’t answer a simple question of what gives you the right to hold others to standards you don’t feel you, yourself, should be held to. And when confronted with that, all you can do is make false accusation without evidence and hurl insults while blaming others for your shortcomings.
I haven’t criticized you for anything— what I have done if laid to the facts as you have presented yourself: and the evidence is in your comments.
Facing the consequences of your actions is not a state of victimhood.
Do you genuinely don't know what is criticizing someone about or is it just you don't want to admit you criticize people but don't want to allow them to criticize your ideals?
I just asked you questions and pointed out the facts. it’s not “criticism” simply because you find them inconvenient or because you don’t like them. also, I don’t recall expressing my ideals in this conversation: perhaps you could link to where I did that? or will you ignore that question, too?
That's the point, you expressed nothing and tried to pull the "you're wrong and here are the blank papers" card while you didn't even show why you disagree. If you summarize anything with content you said in the discussion you end up with nothing. Also, stop editing the comment to always say that I'm not responding, that's really annoying when I'm literally trying to respond to everything you say.
You knocked the nail on the head with the first instance:
With federation you can join like minded spaces, nobody is forcing anybody to join a particular instance. The whole thing is about freedom and choice yet you seem to want to limit that choice for people?
It doesn't limit the choice of people (it's quite the opposite actually). It's limiting people access and restricting people from the tool itself instead of letting the people themselves isolating naturally their groups without restraining others' liberties. They can do anything as a private space but that doesn't mean everything every decision is good and can't be criticized. Also, I defend the right of those instances to be assholes even if I disagree with everything and if someone would try to FORCE a specific set of rules on any instance I would stand for their rights; bit again, that doesn't make them free of doing bad things with their rights or from criticizing, and my criticism is that the Internet should be free as in freedom.
I also agree they have the right to be twats... On their own instance and with a way for others to not listen. I'm not really sure what the argument here actually is.
The whole thing is entirely free and fair - you can say what you want and you can block out what you want. I'm not sure I understand what the criticism is other than wanting to shout at people who don't want to hear it.