That post explicitly says it's not a place for debate or participation from users of other instances.
I'd like to respect that but I think events like this need debate and discussion because it helps to develop and evolve the culture of lemmy and the fediverse in general.
The post says:
This post is "FYI only" for blahaj lemmy members. It is not a debate, and is not intended for non blahaj lemmy users to weigh in and offer opinions.
I recently received reports of a feddit.uk user espousing transphobia. Specifically, this was a feddit.uk user refusing to use the word cis, repeating the "adult human female" dog whistle, and claiming that trans women are not women. I approached a member of the feddit.uk admin team and raised my concerns and sought clarification of their stance on posts like this, where the transphobia is mostly dogwhistles, and "civil disagreement" on the validity of trans folk.
I was told by the feddit.uk admin that their preferred response is this kind of transphobia is to "sort it out through discussion and voting". However, the comments in question are currently more upvoted than downvoted, and little "sorting out" has occurred. The posts remain in place.
At this point, the admin stopped responding to my messages despite being active elsewhere on lemmy. When it became clear they were ignoring my messages and had no intention of removing the posts in question, I made the decision to defederate the instance.
I know some folk agree with the feddit.uk admins approach of pushback through discussion and voting, but this instance is not designed to be that kind of space. Blahaj lemmy is meant to be a place where we can avoid the rampant transphobia universally visible on nearly every other social media platform, and where we can exist without needing to debate our right to do so.
Yes, semantics.
Users choose to Curate which communities they go into. They do this with full access to the rules of the community and the ability to instantly opt out of that community or instance should it become distasteful to them. Moderation of those communities is up to the owner of the community and is operated under the rules of the instance admins. Users choose to read and subscribe to these communities and if they're not happy with the moderation then they can choose to curate those communities out of their feed.
Administrators who defederate over differences in moderation choices rather than moderate their own communities and let their users choose what communities they want to see.
Literally, no. Why would you pull that card then go on to write a paragraph that demonstrates your understanding of the distinction?
Again, that you want to choose with such granularity is a personal preference, one you can engage in by signing up on any number of aligned instances.
How, exactly, is your experience impacted by the way blahaj runs things? Except for your deluded perception that they bully other admins and mods into maintaining their standards in order to not be defederated?
Blahaj federates with corners of the fediverse they are confident are safe, and do not, when they aren't. It couldn't be any simpler.
If sopuli didn't defederate instances that are primarily for porn, I could not browse "all" in order to engage in community discovery without seeing a bunch of it. You keep trying pull a "then they should stay on local communities" card but that is completely insane. Why should moderation confine itself to local content?
The whole beauty of federation is that several standards and preferences can interleave and overlay, and each user can navigate to a place in the fediverse where the workload of moderation according to their preferences, has already been done.
Your argument against the way blahaj does things, is an argument against the diversity in the range of such places. You think each user should choose, because that is what you want to do, and so you argue against their ability to choose that someone choose for them.