It would probably follow the Reddit model that began in 2018. Maybe Lemmy.today is the first example of this.

1. Admins ask members left of liberalism to keep the conversation in the centre.
2. Rules are no longer enforced and are watered down.
3. Frivolous bans.
4. Removal of moderators.
5. Defederation from other instances.
6. Ads introduced in the sidebar and posts.

How will the bc conservative false super majority affect the culture of fedecan?

Non legally required moderation.

Hexbear likes to call themselves socialist and communist, but they come across strongly as just another group of fascists.

Thought it was just me.

Yeah, they pretty much only exist to break the left’s solidarity.

Any group that gives any validity to "right of center" takes (basically, amoral and self-serving takes, usually fully sociopathic as well) and doesn't ask the member to explain themselves before giving them a timeout so they can reassess before polluting the space again with their nonsense in the best of cases/banning them forever if the person just doubles down will always be at risk of going full fash/antihuman.

And behind all of this is, of course, the well-known whimsical Western attitude towards life, where everything is a "matter of perspective", "relative" and fundamentally uncertain, right and wrong included. Who can take a stand in earnest in these communities against antihuman nonsense when too many amoral and unserious beings will either tolerate or fully support it, with their inversed values and all? Oh well.

Sees #5:

Ads introduced in the sidebar and posts.

Good grief have some instances begun to enshitify already???

If this is true (please stop it), please consider donating to whichever you think is the most trustworthy as I already know it fucking sucks to have to constantly switch off of things you thought was good until proven wrong.

Liberalism isn't left or right it's about government involvement.

You could just as easily have more rules, like saying who is allowed to post/comment.

2/3 will happen no matter what

4 is usually tied to brigading

5 I think that's more to do with running costs.

It may happen as when cool concepts gets popular certain sections become corrupt.

Windows XP-8.

PS1-3.

Xbox-360.

1776-Nixon-Reagan.

Battlefield 1942-BF6.

COD-Ghosts.

Google 1998-2017.

NES-Switch.

Mastodon was born but then Truth Social spawned from the infernos. The latter collects ungodly amounts of data through their app.

Daaamn... That's the 2014 fb formula/2018 reddit formula right there.

COD got corrupted long before Ghosts. Ghosts was just a bad game.

Also, Andrew Jackson.

Can you go into more detail about before Ghosts?

It started with the runaway success of Call of Duty 4 making Activision turn its Eye of Sauron on the franchise and the developers, bringing in more studios to work the COD mines and turning it into a cash cow. Black Ops 2 for example had that attempt at turning the series into an e-sport with an MLG mode that went nowhere.

Ghosts didn't have anything particularly special about it in terms of predatory practices, but it was the worst entry in the series up to that point.

There’s nothing wrong with the franchise trying a different game mode, yes cod shouldn’t release a game every year as that splits up the player base.

Are there any issues with worker’s exploitation?

There's plenty of exploitation around COD. The question is why Ghosts is the one you identified specifically.

edit ahhh I missed the community name somehow, I am not Canadian sorry facepalm

With respect to 1. the opposite state is just as likely that rules become endlessly byzantine to avoid dealing with fundamental questions or irreconciable truths.

This is really why a lot of absurdist literature and film tends towards the byzantine, it is to make the political apparatus of fascism strangling art and individuality concrete in some way that can be perceived by an audience through aesthetics and motif... which is often through endless arbitrary rules and measurements that categorize and categorize endlessly in a way that feels bluntly unbiased because of an association with sorting, order, measurements, names and numbers but is in architecture silencing of narratives that attempt to weave categories together in different ways or find meaning.

A dystopian society run by a totalitarian state, where departments with names like the Ministry of Information oppress citizens through empty rhetoric and labyrinthine bureaucracy; an everyman protagonist (Jonathan Pryce) longing for escape who resists the authorities through an illicit romance with a similarly rebellious lover; a sinister room of torture where his hopes are finally broken – the literary influence of George Orwell’s 1984, as well as the bureaucratic absurdity of Franz Kafka, is overtly clear in Brazil (1985).

https://www.bfi.org.uk/lists/brazil-terry-gilliam-influences

The lack of this closure is one of the hallmarks of weird fiction. The inexplicability and productive ambiguity emphasized within the mode ensures that the unsettlement of the narrative is mirrored for both character and reader, avoiding closure for either, thereby channeling Robert Aickman’s dictum that an effective piece of weird fiction “must open a door, preferably where no one had previously noticed a door to exist; and at the end, leave it open, or, possibly, ajar.” Weird fiction doesn’t enclose discordant energies or possibilities; it thrives in their ungraspability.

https://ancillaryreviewofbooks.org/2025/05/02/reading-weird-fiction-in-an-age-of-fascism/

edit Exhibit A. https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/77525991

Ghosts is the worst call of duty game, it’s where it sharply went downhill.

Constant frame rate drops and pay2win gun.

they are "we are not like these "other tankies""

when they start parroting right wing talking pts to label everything as "lib", plus they start banning you for very vague reasons.

I always assumed they were far right trolls cosplaying as (their biased image of) leftists for shits and giggles...

0 and 1 are subjective, so not really a masure. 2, 3 and 4 could be indicative. 5 is just enshittification and unrelated, hell, if they're not intrusive they're fine, let the owners pay the hosting costs.

Generally, the freedom of expression is, the greater diversity of opinions there is, the greater the number of disagreements and discussion there is - the better.

That's a good description of how they come across...

I think you might want to distinguish between rules and bureaucracy.

Often, rules/laws become excessively vague to allow inconsistent enforcement. Bureaucracy becomes byzantine to prevent easily changing the results of the initial enforcement action.

I think a more realistic example would be:

Written rule: no bigotry.

Appeals process: message the appeals mod (not listed) on Friday the 13th under a full moon on a good day and include your face scan, ID and credit card number.

The rule itself seems perfectly innocent and good, even, but is intentionally extremely vague, allowing power to arbitrarily decide what constitutes "bigotry". Questioning that decision is also, technically, possible.

Yes but the phenomena I am specifically trying to underline is the way in which a community of conversations can be silenced by simply applying overly restrictive categorization "THIS isn't the place for THAT" type moderation rules to communities.

This both makes it so that people who hold a view that is in conflict with the architects (not necessarily the majority) are forced to attempt to create new alternative communities and try to get them off the ground and it also allows narratives to be silenced through selective moderation according to a byzantine set of rules that you are pretty much always breaking (and nobody cares 99% of the time).

The censorship is spatial, it is never complete, it is like being told by your parents to ask the other parent for permission in an endless ping pong that doesn't ever provide a space for a conversation to happen while simultaneously leaving you nowhere specific to point your finger and blame.

This is a very similar phenomena to society making so many things illegal that the average person can be assumed to be breaking the law by law enforcement and thus law enforcement is able to enact biased policing policies under the guise of unbiased enforcement of byzantine and impossible rulesystems....

...which again is precisely why absurdist theater and literature plays so much with these patterns and motifs as a form of wholistic resistance.

edit To be clear I am not arguing that "this isn't the place for that" isn't needed to some healthy degree, but people don't think about what happens when you don't monitor the growth of that tendency like how in Jurassic Park they assumed the dinosaurs couldn't reproduce so why have the capacity to count any more than they started with...? It is dangerous in a way people assume is benign.

Lemmy.world I am afraid is a great example of this.

That works in real life, but not on the internet. Too many artists that will in fact read the rules in their entirety. That's why they keep them vague.

Edgy jokes.

What does a super majority even mean in a unicameral system?

**Edit
Or should I say in a Westminster system, with no easy way to amend the constitution?

Wen you see .ml after their name, and when you see content that is from a place with .ml after its name, shit isn’t good.