the evillest purple dot alive @impiaaa@cybre.space

you out there?

you listening?

✌🏻

*as always, there are exceptions—once you start oppressing others with your appearance or such there's a problem. i'm not talking about that

You are valid the way you are, and your goals and desires for who you want to be are equally good and important. Nobody—no person, no culture—can tell you who you should be; only you can define yourself.

That said, it goes both ways. You are not allowed to deny anybody's identity. You can't police anyone's looks* or say their goals are imaginary or wrong. You can NOT dismiss them by claiming they are in denial. These are real people, not characters. You can critique, but only when requested.

ok i guess the account management stuff is about "having control over your own data," but my point is things like mirror bots, archive.org, rom preservation projects, heck even library archives, are very much about controlling someone else's data.

i don't have any answers, but you can't have it both ways.

i bring these both up because really i can empathize with both sides (though lean towards archive everything). there are arguments for both. but somehow it's never fought over. somehow we believe we can have both. we tout the need for reliable evidence but treat erasure like a human right. we criticize corporations for hoarding data but make billions of our own hardened backups. we put delete next to backup in the account settings and fudge a delete button into a loss-resistant protocol.

speaking of. did you know that mastodon account backups include favorites and boosts? so somebody could already have a copy of all your embarrassing posts and there's nothing you can do about it. i mean of course total deletion is never guaranteed if anything ever touches another computer, and sometimes it gets stuck in federation anyway, but this makes it trivial.

do they have a backup of it? maybe. i sure don't keep a copy of everything i post. some of it's already gone forever because of my various instances' inconsistent media purging policies

saw a twitter artist purged their tweets because they were worried somebody would dig up something embarrassing. about half of the reactions were "congrats!" and another half were "what about all the art you posted? :("

the widely supported "right to be forgotten" feels at directly at odds with the also widely supported "archive everything"

fucked the log on

Is it okay to block them? Mute them? Is that also discrimination? What if that kind of isolation is itself triggering to them? If they should be responsible for tagging things, would it not be fair for you to treat them the same?

Let's say, for the sake of argument, there is a person who, for whatever reason, is incapable of using CWs, either for a certain topic or for any of their posts. Should the person:
• be allowed to use Mastodon?
• be allowed on your instance?
• be allowed to post to the local timeline?
• be allowed to make boost-able posts?
It would be understandable for the answer to any of these to be "no," but if no, is that not discriminating based on their ability, rather than quality?

By age 35, you should have given up on your dreams, retirement experts say.

i have no idea when it was added

y'all really seem to like all the joke emoji i make

admin is… dargron?

you're doing your best, and that's what matters.