The definition of UN should be simple enough:

In common language, “hate speech” refers to offensive discourse targeting a group or an individual based on inherent characteristics (such as race, religion or gender) and that may threaten social peace.

A related reading would be the paradox of tolerance, which goes far in explaining why we do not want this shit anywhere near our communities.

As for anti-Semitism, I've seen some of it in response to Israel's ongoing genocide, and of course the current context makes both anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim sentiments a very real problem. However, I think people on here mostly seem to be able to distinguish Israel and Judaism, and when they don't it seems moderators are generally doing a better job than on most platforms in my experience. But I doubt you're here in good faith, so I don't see much point in discussing something like this with you.

That's a pretty mainstream belief for a lot a people who have been completely ostracised and discriminated against by the fediverse as a whole.

If you feel discriminated against because people don't want you around, feel free to vote with your feet.

logical paradox in decision-making theory

^{Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)}

Muntedcrocodile: "I believe in the right to spread hatred as long as it's not calling for violence."

Lemmy: "Um, okay. Let's give that a try. We hate hateful right wing views, and call people with those views total assholes."

muntedcrocodile: "Wait, not like that! You should tolerate us so there's a diversity of views!"

Ironic.

And here lies my point. A vast majority of people don't think its hate speech. And a vast majority of people believe free speech supersedes hate speech.

Actually, a vast majority of people don't support being a shitbag to other people. You're confusing popular sentiment with the whims of the conservative elite. If you don't just hide in right wing echo chambers all the time you might be surprised to find out how unpopular your terrible views are.

I frequent many forums both digital and physical under a multitude of identities and the only ones who despise free speech are the extreme left. Pretty much everyone likes it. Lemmy is the most echo chambery of all the places I visit.

If your views are so popular how did trump win the election? Why have almost all right wing parties across Europe gotten a larger percentage of the vote? Why did almost every state in the us shift more right in the last election? These are the facts. You are objectively wrong

I've provided more facts to support my claim than you have for yours. I've provided nothing, whereas you have actively lied about the nothing you've brought forth. I don't need to prove anything to you.

Not that I could, conservatives don't think anyway, and you can't logic someone out of a position they felt their way into.

Alright I'll bite: yonkersobserver.com/early-resu…

Proof almost all the us moved right in the last election.

statista.com/chart/6852/seats-…

Proof of my Europe claim.

Here's the important charts for ya

Prove me wrong

See, you don't read.

Me: I don't need to prove anything to you.

You: Prove me wrong.

Like, no. You can't even read and parse one paragraph, and you want me to compile a bunch of research you won't understand? You want me to explain the difference between a scant majority of the population who decided to and were permitted to vote and a vast majority of all people everywhere to someone who struggles with basic reading? What a laugh.

Shifting the goalposts.

I made 2 claims u said I was wrong because my claims where wrong I proved my claims where true. Now ur refusing to provide evidence to support your claims. Engage in good faith. Stop being a hypocrite. Have some honour lest I lose what little respect I used to have for u.

Yeap, 100%. The extremists and the terminally online are overrepresented here, and that keeps the masses away.

I'd suggest though to not waste your time arguing with the self-righteous idiots and just focus on bringing more normie-friendly content.

Yeah we do have a lot of people who feel it's more important to demonstrate their anger than to figure out what people could do to improve the problems.

Worse still, a lot of people seem to have convinced themselves that whatever makes it most clear they're angry and hurts the people they disagree with the most is actually what's most productive. The anger about the state of things, particularly in the US is entirely valid. The self-justification of behaviours that burn bridges and radicalize more people is not.

If you want to implement any kind of solution you do, necessarily have to have a critical mass of people who agree with you, and you cannot build that by antagonizing anyone who doesn't already share your exact flavour of left wing ideology, and acting in a way that reflects poorly on your ideology to everyone except people who already agree with you

Very rarely is anyone willing to confront that violence as a means to an end, pragmatically, has enormous costs, and that employing it just because you're (justifiably) angry, is almost always detrimental to the exact abouts you're mad about

(Sorry, I know I kinda went off track from exactly what you were talking about, this is just a closely related huge frustration of mine)

Even now, I keep arguing against idiots posting “kill a cop” or “kill fascists” memes, like this is literally an “advocate violence” platform

soooo much! Not only is this becoming an "advocate violence" platform, people are getting pissed if they have a post removed for advocating violence. Lemmy will def end up in the news after some crazy shoots up people and they find out he was all over Lemmy being cheered on to shoot billionaires or something.

Who is going to pay for those ads? With what money? There is no single entity here with enough interest in growing the Fediverse, and any grassroots movements that we do have are strictly against commerce.

The Lemmy devs would be making more money if they went to work for Uber Eats than as software developers, and I barely manage to convince people to pay $2.50/month to offer a professional hosting service.

We don't really need to "buy ads" to grow. We just need to get more people willing to invest in it.

Network effects are incredibly strong

Yet, Bluesky has grown to 35M+ active accounts, even though they started way after us

We have the advantage that we’re not growth focused

This is not an "advantage". This is an excuse we tell ourselves to cope with our failures.

The inevitable enshittification will do its job eventually,

And when it does, the majority of people will go the next shiny "free as in beer", VC-funded siloed platform and we are going to be just another "They don't know" meme.