I feel compelled to talk a little bit about this #Fosstodon situation, having had my struggles with the instance and its moderation.

You need to start with the inherent tension in the instance's Code of Conduct, which states the following as a goal:

Provide a friendly, safe, and welcoming environment for everyone interested in Free/Libre/Open-Source Software, regardless of level of experience, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age, religion, nationality, political affiliation, or other similar characteristic.

But also clarifies that Fosstodon is not:

A free speech zone. Fosstodon is a community with specific — and high — standards of behaviour. If you would like to exercise your full free speech rights, you can do so somewhere else; while on Fosstodon, you should agree to follow the community rules set out in this CoC.

Nor is it:

An advocacy space. There are many important, controversial and political issues; and advocating for what you believe is important. However, Fosstodon is not the place for that advocacy. Even correct views can violate our CoC.

"We welcome all, as long as you don't talk about your identity too much, or what really matters to you other than FOSS." Look, instances can have the rules they choose, which users implicitly agree to by signing up. But it seems a bit much to ask users to render all other aspects of their identity subordinate to their interest in technology. This is a common refrain amongst a certain kind of tech bro enthusiast: keep your "politics" out of my tech. Of course, all technology is political, and the FOSS movement more than most. Ignoring or suppressing those aspects of the movement does a disservice to it. It also insults or ignores the many, many developers whose open source work we rely on, and whose identities and related advocacy would be considered "political."

To separate these spheres has never been realistic. Now, it's at best tragicomic, and at worst collaboration with authoritarianism.

The "solution," as they'll readily tell you, is to "find another instance." Which is exactly what I did, when I received warnings for posting about anti-trans legislation without a content warning. To be fair, the warning was a slap on the wrist, but I had been feeling the tension growing between my need to speak out and the apparent distaste for such speech on Fosstodon. Even the CW policing felt deeply problematic to me. I firmly believe Content Warnings are best used to prevent undue trauma. What they ought not become is a way to conveniently hide the suffering of others from those who would rather not see it.

So I departed. Others have arrived at the same, or similar, conclusions.

Now we come to the current matter, in which a fascist-aligned moderator engaged in conduct outside Fosstodon that made members feel unsafe. The claim by the Fosstodon admins that they are "happy with" the individual's moderation work, and that it doesn't reflect those views, demonstrates the exact untenable position described above: considering Fosstodon (or any online space) as a "politics-free zone" in which one's identity, conduct, and behavior outside that zone have no bearing on it. This is preposterous on its face: if I commit violent assault outside your bar, will you be comfortable when I take a seat and order a beer?

The threshold does not erase the behavior, nor protect anyone inside from it.

This is true for any user, but it is especially true for those put in positions of power, such as moderators. The power dynamic of online moderation requires that those entrusted with said power be of sufficient observable, upstanding character as to reassure users that the moderator will execute their duties judiciously and fairly. Once that's compromised, the moderator can no longer fulfill their duties.

Fosstodon, and those who similarly want to separate "politics" from their space, face an inflection point. Does it matter more that their users are actually safe, and able to express themselves as their whole selves, or does it matter more than the bubble remain intact? That is a choice each user and each community must make, but it's worth remembering what you become when you let the Nazis cross the threshold.