Ah, but that’s point. What is more important: anti-human trafficking or the message of anti-human trafficking? They don’t get to decide what a platform does, but they do get to decide their use of that platform.

Back when it was first becoming known that Facebook was passively allowing human trafficking groups and was generating revenue from those groups, I asked around different anti-human trafficking collectives whether or not they would continue to use the platform given ad revenue from their users goes towards creating safe spaces for those bad actors. I received silence from every single one of them. They ignored that question and continued to post how we all need to fight for trafficking victims (very marketing style posts if that makes sense).

Some people are just so engrained in platforms that it doesn’t matter what a platform does. When faced with a choice between comfort and ethics, they choose comfort at the expense of all else.

deleted by creator

Is that something we can already do or do you mean that as an idea? That’s a neat idea if so. I don’t think a user’s subscription page is locked out, so might be neat to replace the random mag block with newly updated subscribed mags via greasemonkey script or something.

Yeah, I noticed that too. I’m not sure if that’s just due to that being local content and maybe mirroring remote content is slowed down with all the new activity and instances coming online. I also see in user settings a text box for “Featured Magazines” but I can’t find any documentation on what/how that works. I would figure it would prioritize those mags, but I’m not sure of anything yet.

I read their post explaining the decision, but it seems like it is at odds with itself. If your goal is to create a safe space, why are you using a federated service? I understand you have the option to defederate, but at that point why didn’t you just setup a standalone message board. It just feels that their use case doesn’t fit the system.