Man, you had a good point initially, but now you’re just really stubbornly defending a position you must realize is a really thin one. You’re arguing that they implied defederation isn’t important, but that’s a straw man you yourself constructed, not what they said at all.
I think you might have lost sight of what’s rational for pride or something.
Well, I might have an idea why it’s downvoted so.
While I agree with the sentiment, and as such, upvoted to boost the message, it’s still very combative and needlessly passive-aggressive with its kumbayah and the stereotypical hippie talk, “man”, which really just annoyed and cringed myself too.
But to each their own. I still like to boost if the sentiment is valuable as a pov at least, here I happen to also agree. But the passive-aggressive tone is really uncalled for.
Edit: I read further ahead, and this person in question continues their combative and provocative tone. I’m tempted to recall my upvote just because of this, but it’s a good perspective to consider, so I’ll stick with boosting this specific comment with an upvote (though not the later ones that ramp up the toxicity). But I really do not like the tone… I can very clearly now see why many would downvote.
I would assume that since this whole thing is more or less a result of left-ish policy, and the opponent in the scenario is the far-right platform formerly known as Twitter, lead by the aspiring far-right icon Musk, the right-wingers would more likely opt to complain, cry several rivers and eventually turn to alternatives catered specifically for them (not even sure which ones are still alive after former tweetyplace took the crown) instead.
Haven’t done a vibe check on bluesky, but I assume it almost has to be more tolerant and potentially more progressive-ish than the old nazibirdhouse. If you lean towards the far right, why choose that, if alternatives exist?