So people also use the term “news provider”? What about “email channel”? This argument falls apart fairly quickly with any level of scrutiny.

The English language has connotations. Certain words are more likely to be paired with others due to cultural or historical reasons. “Instance” has a medical and technical connotation; and Lemmy is a technology (software). News is not technical, so it is unlikely (but still correct) to use the word “instance” with it.

Email is more of a service than a technology, so due to connotation, it is often paired with “provider”. However, “email instance” is still a completely correct phrase.

Once again, we should not be calling fundamentals of the English language “gatekeeping”. This is how you get widespread ignorance and shitty communities.

P.S. Also, your “no one outside of Lemmy” argument is also just wrong. Invidious, Redlib, and other frontends refer to themselves as instances. Bluesky calls itself an instance. And it is very common to use the term for weather services as well.

Can we make it okay for humans to use their brains again?

The term “instance”, in this context, means exactly what it says - it is one existence of many. How is this gatekeeping or jargon?

This implies to me that the “gatekeeping” you are referring to is reading comprehension and basic vocabulary; and frankly, if we’ve stooped that low, keep them out. There is nothing to be gained from a group that refuses to learn the basic definition of the word “instance”.

P.S. “provider” is a good (and correct) term as well.

Would you consider basic economics specialized knowledge?

freedom means freedom to be able to fail without destroying your life.

Well said.

The unfortunate reality is that part of economic model is combating bad actors. A society that where the people truly believe in this can be built in a lifetime, and it will torn down by the worst among us in a decade. That is simply not a good investment.

Even in Europe, there are significant strides in tearing down what makes the people there happy and succeed (see the AfD in Germany).

This is an incentives problem through-and-through. These types of people should not, and cannot, exist in a functioning society - yet they do. The problem is that we have not figured out a good incentive-model to stop these people from gaining a foothold, so we must individually punish them for attempting to destroy the community.

This is the same exact problem with advertisers. And in the same way, we have not figured out a good way to stop them.

I would like to avoid going on a rant, so I’ll just say this - capitalism does not work. The phenomena you are describing (… now people have too low standards) is called “tyranny of the majority” and capitalism does not have an answer for this. Hence why we really need to figure something out.

As a side note, I do not think communism nor socialism are the answer either! Despite what many are led to believe, we live in primitive times and have not figured out a sustainable economic model.

People moved from Facebook to Reddit in the past because it was seen as the more community-centric platform.

This has taken a wild shift over the last 5 years; no one who moved over was hoping for Reddit becoming an ad-centric platform.

Decentralization is not a silver bullet. If lemmy.world hits 1 million users, and then a large corporation buys it, lemmy will be set back 10 years. This is an incentive problem, and no amount of workarounds is going to fix it.

We agree here, but this will not necessarily stop the rot. Companies will just approach these communities and offer the leaders massive buyouts, and then flood it with ads (see Twitch).

Communities themselves need mechanisms to punish or vandalize advertisements.

Until the community supported platform becomes an advertiser supported one. Remember they said this same exact thing when moving from Facebook to Reddit.

Running is not going to save the online community. People have been running for the last 30 years, and it led us to some of the darkest times we’ve seen in 100 years. Instead we need to fight back and strategically retreat. Change the incentive structure - make advertisers absolutely miserable, and those who leech from advertisers should be similarly flogged.