I mean the flip side of what you are saying is that people aren't allowed to have a social life free from romantic pursuit. Yes, it's a thin line to walk but you are only seeing the view from a person with limited romantic opportunities, not the person who is tired of every social interaction being hijacked by dude number 67897 "out to find people you enjoy spending time with, and maybe some of them are also people you consider pursuing romantically."
Like I totally get your perspective here. Doing things, and then... Organic relationship with no pressure. That's ideal. The problem is that horny dudes hold this ideal in their head, and then use it to justify blowing up every coed activity in existence. You might think, "ok, if she says no, I'll drop it" but the counterpoint is that this ritual becomes a chore for the other side of the fence. You are socially awkward, now imagine that any time you socialize in a group you have to awkwardly defend against someone's iterative advances. And that this happens so often, it begins to color the way you interact with every acquaintance.
Yes, meeting people in group settings often leads to dates. But going into those settings with the intention to find a date is a recipe for problems. This is a subtle, but important distinction which seems lost on a lot of people.
This can backfire too though, since women assume any man coming to these events is just looking to hook up, so their guard is high. It's also kind of shitty to make all extracurricular activities into dating events imo. People should have a space away from that pressure.
Honestly for me the best way to meet single is to have married friends who can play matchmaker. Of course that requires you to have friends, which brings us back to square one.
Ah damn, I was a state actor who was going to smuggle in sleeper agents to perform sabotage and espionage in the US, but I can't figure out how to create a fake social media profile. I admit defeat.
So you can still ban the voting agent. Worst case scenario you have to wait for a single rule breaking comment to ban the user. That seems like a small price to pay for a massive privacy enhancement.
I don't think you do. Admins can just ban the voting agent for bad voting behavior and the user for bad posting behavior. All of this conflict is imagined.
This is literally already the Lemmy trust model. I can easily just spin up my own instance and send out fake pub actions to brigade. The method detecting and resolving this is no different.
In addition to that, I guarantee you that meta and the like are already running data mining instances on here. Being publicly tied to votes is just more telemetry for the machine. I don't quite understand why people seem to think that is no big deal.
Who cares? Generating an infinite number of tokenized identities to facilitate ban evasion will just result in an instance getting defederated. This introduces no real risk as long as the instance is generally abiding by the rules.
Most of us here are fairly anonymous anyway. I dont think being able to add an additional layer of privacy to our activity is really a big deal.
She literally spent a good portion of her eulogy talking about how wives are not supposed to be slaves. You can't make this shit up.