It’s very difficult to engage in a constructive dialogue with someone making a series of “you” statements telling the other person their opinion.

I hear that you are upset by this, and I can tell there are strong emotions behind your post, but I think it may be best to take a break from this thread as what has been posted is not constructive.

It was made clear in the OP that the admin team did not believe there is a critical mass of users to support a separate space just for veganism. That had been explained clearly. Others have pointed out that many vegans consider vegetarianism to be similar enough to veganism for them to be combined, so it should be apparent that compromise is acceptable to others.

Refusing to compromise or engage in meaningful, authentic discussion, trying to hear what others are saying, is not going to be a successful strategy. Here or anywhere, for that matter. It’s absolutism.

Anyway, I don’t have a horse in this race. I’m neither vegan nor vegetarian and won’t be participating in that community, but I would suggest you take a break from this thread and start a new post in a few days when you are emotionally ready to listen to understand.

Vegetarians usually don’t eat fish, that’s a pescatarian. The distinction between vegans and vegetarians is that one believes in using animal products, and the other doesn’t. That’s a considerable philosophical position, can you feed an animal and take its milk, eggs, honey, etc? They also tend not to extend their philosophy into stuff, which is a weak position to take, but even vegans have trouble not using animal products (tbh it’s hard enough to buy things that don’t involve human exploitation let alone animal, impossible to go to the hospital as a vegan, etc). I don’t think it’s fair to call one a diet and the other a philosophy, but rather both exist on a spectrum of ethics and conservation. That orientation on the spectrum now has a community. Socialism certainly has its infighting, but we cooperate, and you should too.

i am aware of the distinctions you are describing. i am even sympathetic to your position. i’m telling you that the sort of lines you are drawing here are not ones that most people feel the need to draw, and that regardless of how right you believe yourself to be, your opinion that these communities aught not touch is both not common, and not universal to vegans. there are places for which the sort of exclusive moderation policies you describe would be welcome and even necessary. the formation of such a community in the fediverse is inevitable. but that does require a certain critical mass of people who support such a community, and if that support doesn’t exist, then it doesn’t exist.

also, the likelihood that people in a community about veganism and vegetarianism will inevitably include pictures containing dead animals, is, i think, at least a little bit presumptive. the content moderation will be determined by the moderators in the community, which doesn’t exist yet, so you don’t know that for certain.

the content moderation of Beehaw seems to me not in service of granular, insular subcultures, but collections of common interests, and like it or not, vegans and vegetarians do have many common interests.

I never met a vegetarian who eats fish or liked fishing/watching caged animals in a zoo.

It looks like you invented your own vegetarian that has nothing to do with the actual philosophy of vegetarianism to get mad at, so you can justify your elitism.

Honestly, I joined beehaw knowing that the admins would run it like a benevolent dictatorship. It’s their instance, their servers, their time and effort, and I respect that.

you will enjoy what we are imposing, period

Yep, if you want to make your own community your own way, there’s plenty of other instances that offer that.

You could easily make the same arguments about nearly any community we have on this site and most especially about POC or LGBTQ, the difference is that these groups have chosen to be inclusive of similar identities rather than exclusionary.

I don’t think it’s strange.

Moderating online communities can be a lot of work. And Beehaw is really trying to maintain civili friendly discourse here.

Part of maintaining civility (without tons of moderating power) is limiting conversation topics where different members are passionately on different sides.

The philosophical implications of the word ‘veganism’ aren’t always obvious to those from outside vegan spaces, which is why I suggested ‘plant based’ as an alternative phrasing.

I might be missing something, but is it the case that we won’t be able to discuss veganism? I’m vegan for ethical reasons so I do get where you’re coming from with this, but I think there might be perspectives you’re not seeing.

I became vegan something like six years ago and prior to that I was vegetarian for my entire life. I was vegetarian because I had a moral problem with killing things. I became vegan because I eventually ended up actually listening to vegans’ arguments for why dairy etc. aren’t hugely different morally speaking from meat. If you want to create more vegans - and thereby reduce suffering - vegetarians are probably some of the most receptive people to these points, assuming they don’t get alienated.

Assuming I’m not missing something and it is the case that we’d be able to have friendly discussions with people about why we believe veganism is a better moral choice, I don’t really see what’s so wrong here.

they cater to multiple ideologies, sexual inclinations, races, etc.

They don’t, though. !lgbtq_plus@beehaw.org and !poc@beehaw.org are single communities that each represent several different minority groups. Combined, the LGBTQ+ and POC communities are probably a larger percentage of the world (and Beehaw) than people who don’t eat meat.

I am a vegan, and I understand that veganism is a philosophy. However, the reality is that we’re a small group, and we have a lot in common with vegetarians. We are either going to get a combined community for people who don’t eat meat, or no community at all.

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Well, to weigh in here…I don’t think I saw anywhere about the admins saying it’s not a topic up for discussion. I believe what they were saying is that in order to organize the communities in a way that is feasible for members (of Beehaw or other) to be able to see/find communities in a broader sense.

While I am not vegan or vegetarian…I can understand the frustration. It’s like trying to combine (for lack of a better example) arts. Lets say they combined a Sci-Fi and Fantasy board. While they may be radically different at their core, they can still fall under the broader category of writing or arts. Even though they may contrast or not even be completely related… its the broader sense of organizing them into categories that can easily be digested. I know it may be a stretch, but this is how I choose to interpret these actions. It’s not a snub or a malicious intent behind the restructuring, just some house cleaning.

Now, I can’t speak for the mods and admins… but… with boards like this, just as categories can be combined, they can also be separated. Who is to say that this may not happen in the future as Beehaw continues to grow. It’s never said that this was meant to be permanent, so far as I can see. Again, can’t speak for the mods or admins but they could also make it go under one title and two separate boards under one heading. Names can easily be modified.

I’m certain that if we talk to the admins/mods, respectfully, as they have been with us, it’ll make it easier to co-operate.

Just my 2 cents. :)