I disagree, not really an unpopular opinion.

There's no elected leader, but there's an implicit one: the one organizing it, who might just give you the cold shoulder for any number of reasons. Anarchism is best defined in Wikipedia, and isn't really limited to "small scales". It is most validated when it is a movement existing within authoritarian states, out of necessity, which is why Revolutionary Action joined into the Revolutionary Committee among other groups, which is what you are referring to.

By itself and out of context, and specially when it manifests in societies that are actually functional, democratic, and with adequate social policies, I favor my own definition, but it can't really be defined practically and objectively without context. "No (to your Russian) rules except the ones I agree with (Ukrainian national stability and identity), otherwise GFY" sprinkled with a heavy dose of personal charisma is what Revolutionary Action is doing to Russia as it attempts to annex Ukraine, thanks for the example.

That's why I'm a proponent of a a truly federated system where for any community you would be able to choose which are the people in charge of moderating/curating your feed.

You need to be able to criticize moderators, and moderators need to be able to accept criticism, both good and bad. Some of those bans really speak towards really insecure moderation. I'm also not a fan of them being able to get complete anonymity while doing so. What usually happens is the problems is a bad apple within the mod team but the rest will still get defensive regardless when the only one you can blame is the entire group, it's group psychology 101.

Even "ACAB" cops all have an ID number that can identify them, and on lemmy it's even easier to create an alt. Heck, if you go over to their Matrix chat and talk to lemmy heads, they don't consider unfair abusive lemmy bans a big deal because "its ok if people are forced to create a new alt, if they aren't culpable they won't get banned again". Literally fucking shit logic, specially considering if a ban was actually justified you would not want to lose track of who that person is masquerading as.

The same reddit double standard is here, and I see that the modlog doesn't even seem to be displaying who the particular admin or mod who performed the action was anymore while still providing only the most minimal explanation with no chance for individual users to contest it. Seriously, all it took was for mods to create a mod alias, but even that was too much?

People left Reddit because of the API problem, but the problem was there long before. Subreddits like modsbeingdicks and others got banned even though their moderation did a top notch job at making sure personally identifiable information was removed from posts and comments in comparison to other subreddits that still remain. The future of Lemmy may very well be limited to becoming a poor man's Reddit. The Stanford prison experiment, read up on it, and if you find it too uncomfortable, jump on the bandwagon of trying to find something to nitpick about the study as it has become customary to do so, doesn't change how relatable it is.

A VPN is just essentially a change in ISP.

Stainless steel leaches nickel and chromium.

Just a note, while ranked voting is much better, the people who are influenced by parties that game the system and a gullible ignorant base usually consolidate themselves into one big party that still does everything to undermine the rest of the coalitions as long as it makes them look bad even if it's worse off for society as a whole and that like a tumor can keep growing until it goes past the midpoint for toppling the democracy that elected it. It's part of the solution, but not all of it, societies act like headless chickens when things get bad enough, regardless of who was responsible for them. For example, Brexit.

Internationally, there's a huge correlation between the parties influenced by money and special interests and the ones quite willing to let society burn if it makes their opponents look bad, and it's such a shame that society always seems to have these at the other end because of an influentially gullible voter base.

Users could also be doing and reporting the checking up - if votes were transparent - and they would be able to do it on far wider scale. Oh those leopards, eating your faces, vote obfuscation proponents.

Because before, if you were trash you were ostracized and it was effective. Now, they can join a social support group of trash that will be easy to politically mobilize as long as they are given relevance. They just need to be normalized and led into living in a bubble so controlled that they only focus on how the rest of the society is wrong while evading introspectively looking at how much worse and how much more contradictory some of the elements within their bubble are.

ITT: Frantic redefinition of what anarchism is. Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

Since this comment means its my turn now, I'll redefine it into "no rules except the ones I agree with, otherwise GFY" sprinkled with a heavy dose of personal charisma that often clouds objectivity and the complexity of the reality.

"The true fascist are the people who try to place control on disinformation being used to prop fascists!" - Musk, probably

Money whale hunting.