The Lemmy.World Terms of Service now in effect

Hello World!

We’ve made some changes today, and we’d like to announce that our Code of Conduct is no longer in effect. We now have a new Terms of Service, in effect starting from today(October 19, 2023).

The “LAST REVISION DATE:” on the page also signifies when the page was last edited, and it is updated automatically. Details of specific edits may be viewed by following the “Page History” reference at the bottom of the page. All significant edits will also be announced to our users.

The new Terms of Service can be found at legal.lemmy.world

In this post our community mods and users may express their questions, concerns, requests and issues regarding the Terms of Service, and content moderation in Lemmy.World. We hope to discuss and inform constructively and in good faith.

BigBlackCockroach,
@BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.world avatar

Is there any chance of going back to pure and enlightened Anarchism?

RickRussell_CA,
@RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world avatar

Lots of people think anarchy is what they want, until they get it.

TJD,

Sure seems like a lazy way to dismiss the argument, just saying that he actually doesn’t know what he wants.

RickRussell_CA,
@RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world avatar

My detailed response

drmoose,

Community is vital for anarchy to work. It’s hard to do that in an open online community tbh.

KpntAutismus,

no rules sounds pretty good, maybe there’s even an instance for it. but i guarantee that there will be a LOT of nazis and queerphobes. and that’s not why i am here.

HelloHotel, (edited )
@HelloHotel@lemmy.world avatar

Not to put your point down, but to enritch it.

people have longed for X utopia, but when people get it its a distopian hellscape.

This phrase was said about ideologies like capitolism, communism, liberalism, conservitism, anarchism (like tou did) and likely more.

each time I pose a question, was the pure vision an evil one, or did it get twisted apon or after implementation

RickRussell_CA,
@RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world avatar

I argue that, in the specific problem space of Internet discussion communities, the absence of central guidance has been shown again and again to result in a race to the bottom.

That’s why computer networks have struggled with the problem for literally decades, since before http was a glimmer in the mind of Tim Berners-Lee. I well remember early USENET node providers claiming “completely uncensored” access to all newsgroups, only to find within 6 months or a year that they had to dramatically scale back on that promise by restricting the newsgroup list, or cancel certain customers, due to lawbreaking behavior. The problems of discussion forum moderation gave us Section 230, which grants immunity to site moderators for good-faith actions to restrict distribution of information which is “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable”.

Section 230 is pretty much an acknowledgment that without moderation, forums will almost inevitably descend into threats and harassment. And if you think that surely even a non-controversial forum could survive without moderation, look at what happened to Ravelry.

steelrat,
@steelrat@lemmy.world avatar

I miss the high technical bar to entry. Was great.

ttmrichter,
@ttmrichter@lemmy.world avatar

Having lived through the “Eternal September” beginnings, I’m sorry but you’ve got very strongly rose-tinted glasses on.

(Ref)USENET was a cesspool on the order of any modern *chan board or their ilk both before and after the Eternal September. Having a high technical bar to entry just meant most participants were obsessive lunatics with poor socialization (instead of merely half).

steelrat,
@steelrat@lemmy.world avatar

this comment smells like a windows irc client

ttmrichter,
@ttmrichter@lemmy.world avatar

A Windows IRC client … to access Lemmy?

That would be a high technical bar to entry!

RickRussell_CA,
@RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world avatar

Having a high technical bar to entry just meant most participants were obsessive lunatics with poor socialization (instead of merely half)

Umm

ninekeysdown,
@ninekeysdown@lemmy.world avatar

Thanks for being upfront and clear about things. I know it’s not easy.

If you don’t have anyone on the team who has great soft skills I’d suggest you put out a call for “community managers.” Mostly for things like this.

Keep up the great work! I’m glad to see how everything is coming together. 🍻

antik,
@antik@lemmy.world avatar

Thank you! But funny you bring this up…

Because that’s exactly what we are working on. Community Management and Engagement Management teams are being formed. Community managers will be checking up on moderation and are about keeping communities healthy. Community Engagement team will be responsible to help provide content, putting community’s in the spotlight and more.

Formation of these teams is ongoing, if anyone reads this and is interested contact me or @clueless_stoner

Anyway, more on that in a different thread soon!

Serinus,

Oh, does that mean there will be a place to appeal moderation? The only issue I’ve had so far is on lemmy.ml, but it’d be nice to know there’s some recourse to mods pushing an agenda or propaganda.

clueless_stoner,

Yes, it will be possible to report abusive moderation with your own input, hopefully very soon.

kayaven,
@kayaven@lemmy.world avatar

4.0.1: You were not permanently banished from the website in the past.

Doesn’t this imply that only having a temporary ban allows you to keep going on some other account? Seems like quite the loophole.

ninekeysdown,
@ninekeysdown@lemmy.world avatar

Idk, it seems pretty clear.

If you got a permaban then you’re not welcome.

The world temporary isn’t used there. There would be nothing to stop someone from just making a new account in either case. But if it were obvious someone was trying to get around that clause then it would be more than enough of a reason to swing the ban hammer.

ultravioletgaia,

I hope this is better than reddit😅

coffeebiscuit,

Your first post and already 5 upvotes.

RandomPancake,

Your post has been removed by Reddit.

Reason: threatening violence

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

Unfortunately, it looks like this community swinging too far the other way. They literally removed rules against discrimination.

m3t00,
@m3t00@lemmy.world avatar

trusting you to fairly enforce these rules since they are beyond my willingness to parse. IANAL That said, golden rule always applies. If a suspension or ban is warranted, please require a clear reference to the violation so behavior can be modified in the future. Hate getting banned with no reason or hope of avoiding future violations.

IverCoder,

You anal?

Kevnyon,
@Kevnyon@lemmy.world avatar

am not a lawyer

ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

We.

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

How frequently do you get banned from communities for no reason?

AMillionNames, (edited )

In this regard, this is pretty damning: kbin.social/…/Just-wanted-a-warning-Lemmy-World-i…

Also, adding having to agree to the Terms of Service when a new user creates an account is good, but does nothing when they create the user from another instance. Lemmy instances that want to implement this might want to consider forcing users coming from other instances to have to agree to general Terms of Service before they can fully participate.

antik,
@antik@lemmy.world avatar

That thread filled with people who got banned from Lemmy World. You think everyone there is arguing in good faith?

And some of the reactions to the new ToS have been quite aggressive towards the admin team, even though there is nothing there that changed how people can use our site. Be a decent person and you are welcome, that is the document’s purpose.

We had reactions telling us “fuck off corporate shills” and “suck my balls” and publicly stating they will be a problem and then it’s Shocked Pikachu when they get banned and start threads everywhere.

As you pointed out, people who sign up on Lemmy World have to agree to these terms by typing “I agree” in the sign-up form. We’re looking into other options for existing users.

AMillionNames,

Part of what you are saying may be true, but what the OP is claiming definitely isn’t. The Internet Wayback Machine links to the “offending” comment, which they couldn’t have manipulated, and the modlog reason on lemmy.world isn’t lying. Worse, it was a comment in this thread where “Users may express their questions, concerns, requests and issues regarding the Terms of Service, and content moderation in Lemmy.World. We hope to discuss and inform constructively and in good faith.” that got him banned with the claim that he was “disagreeing with the Terms of Service” because of it, and it does not seem that any apology or acknowledgement has been sent.

Speaking of which, you can go through OP’s history in their kbin.social account and find out how he was defending your admin team from the reactions you are complaining about until he had his comment history completely deleted and his account banned on lemmy.world.

The problem isn’t just with existing users, the problem is with new and existing users from other Lemmy instances who aren’t going to have the same Terms of Service as you. You are basically going to have to come up with a way to get them to agree with it before they can participate in it, and given that this server seems to be within the EU, that probably also means some additional GDPR concerns when obtaining if you are trying to cover yourselves legally.

PeleSpirit,

That does look like they deleted the person by accident. When people are attacking you, it’s hard to see everyone clearly.

AMillionNames, (edited )

Except that according to OP’s comments elsewhere, they haven’t apologized or communicated directly with them, they haven’t answered their ticket, and the entries in the modlog of them doing those actions have been removed. Nothing about that looks like the actions of someone making an accident and owning up to it.

The reason that was archived hardly makes it seem like an accident:

Banned @InternetTubes

reason: disagreeing with the Terms of Service - don’t worry your content is gone

web.archive.org/web/…/@InternetTubes

web.archive.org/web/20231019235547/…/modlog

OP has also pointed out that you can search for HEISENBERG in a more recent modlog and look back and see that a lot of entries have been removed, web.archive.org/web/20231021224842/…/modlog . This is about the only thing that could seem like an accident, even if the timing does make it seem suspicious.

There’s also another person joining in and making claims that seem to support that they act this way: lemmy.ml/comment/5060380

PeleSpirit,

That all does sound like there is a rogue admin, have you contacted Ruud or another one of the admins? This isn’t a faceless organization, but a volunteer one. Someone could have came in to do harm, or this is a shitty instance (I’m leaning towards it being an attack). I haven’t had anything weird happen, but I’ve been naive about this before. Ruud could be being naive too. I think we’d love to know how this all turns out, so keep us updated.

AMillionNames,

According to OP, they believe it was the same admin who’s been writing the ToS because of the last comment and the ban reason although there is no direct evidence of it. They did provide a screenshot of a ticket having been made in mastodon.world that hasn’t been answered.

Just looked at Ruud’s account, and he has been inactive for a few weeks now, he may not be available and this may have been done in his absence. I think Antik has been the only one to reply, but saying that a whole instance is untrustworthy and associating to people complaining about how this server has handled itself seems like deflection, specially when OP seems to have defended lemmy.world against those very same criticisms in the past.

I really just wanted to know, but having no clear answer is an answer to itself. I’ll just let this alt become my new main so I don’t have to risk the wipeout. It still leaves a lot of possible potential damage, but people are crowding around this instance, whatchagonnado.

PeleSpirit,

It’s hard for any of us from the outside looking in to make a judgement call. The OP could be sending threatening messages to that admin to cause drama, it could be an honest mistake, a malicious admin or the whole instance is Meta masquerading as a decent instance, we just don’t know. There are a lot of serious malicious actors trying to take this instance down, that was obvious a month or so ago. As you say, whatchagonnado but see how it plays out.

AMillionNames, (edited )

OP has provided all information he can and archived to verify its objectivity. It is the admins who are being silent to the multiple number of complaints. It is hardly due to OP that messages have most certainly been removed from the modlog, it is hardly due to OP that the reason for their ban was what it was and not what you are claiming OP to be, or that the admins are largely remaining silent from this discussion.

When indisputable evidence has been presented, it should be other side to defend themselves, not have speculation provided as if it has the same equal weight. You are basically saying that your speculation regarding the potential bad faith of the OP is the same as all the objective proof that they have provided. It is not.

PeleSpirit,

OP could still be sending threatening messages, have you modded before? The trolls have been out full force here for about 2 weeks now, I’m going to wait and see.

AMillionNames,

Complete speculation, or using said speculation to attempt to argue objective evidence away, really isn’t helpful. Taking that approach, anyone could claim that a stoner admin could have acted as one would expect an admin who is stoned to have acted, it’s just slinging mud.

If reddit proved anything, it’s that waiting won’t force a response if the admin team just wants it to go away. I’m not waiting, and I suspect we will hear little more about this until the next time the base cause of it brings about other issues.

Aux,

If it’s hard to see clearly, then such a person should not be an admin.

PeleSpirit,

This is all volunteer and by donation, be the change you want to see. Mistakes happen. Having been a mod, it’s way harder than it looks. I can’t imagine how hard an admin is.

Jok3r,

Your account is brand new, which of the banned users are you?

AMillionNames,

What do you mean? Are you suggesting new users from other servers should explicitly be asked that question? It seems like just confirming their freely given consent and acceptance of the Terms of Service would cover it. Otherwise, it just seems like you are trying to derail the intent of this community to fish for excuses.

Jok3r,

Just pointing out that you signed up on one instance to complain about the TOS and bans of another one. And that was your first and only action. Pretty sus but I am sure you have no stakes in this

“Derail the intent of this community”, what?

AMillionNames,

I signed up to use Lemmy. It’s federated. I’m also free to sign up in multiple instances as well, just as I’m free to choose to sign up with a new account to discuss something that concerns me, specially when it involves getting entire accounts purged and banned for reasons that don’t seem clear and for which there is evidence that it isn’t just someone with a beef. Are you implying alts should be illegal?

I’m sure the admins share the same concerns as you, and will perform and act as they consider appropriate. It is absolutely none of your concern and your suspicions mean nothing, not to mention you seem to have difficulty reading the bar on the side.

Candelestine,

I don’t know…

“It is absolutely none of your concern and your suspicions mean nothing…” is a blatantly false statement. That is a community member, he has as much right to express his thoughts about the conversation as you do.

AMillionNames, (edited )

I suppose in a way you are right, as I can’t really speak for anyone else’s concern, but his comments are complete speculation that attempt to attack the character and not the argument of the conversation, also derailing it. There’s no way for him to prove his claims, and it just acts to imply that someone could have been banned so their thoughts don’t matter.

Imagine someone banned my account for these comments, would they cease to be relevant? Would they cease to be relevant if I brought my thoughts up on an alt? I guess you could question the motive, specially if the conversation was toxic, but have my questions and concerns been toxic? So even if it became applicable, would his doubts be relevant?

Candelestine,

Unfortunately, credibility does need to be earned, ideas do not exist in a vacuum, nor should they. This is a necessary adaptation to the quantity of information presented to us in the modern day, every day. This is why pure rhetoric and rationality cannot be used to understand the world around us, it’s simply impractical to do that much processing every day.

Calling a person’s credibility into question is thus very valid, as it implies debate is not being entered into in good faith. If you wish this resolved, you will have to earn your right to be listened to by anyone who has any significant amount of experience with online communities. It’s just too easy to spout fancy sounding bullshit like some kind of firehose, manufacture evidence in a variety of ways, and just generally waste people’s time. It happens all the time.

AMillionNames, (edited )

Far enough, but that just goes back to the original problem that the OP ran up against. If they had earned that credibility, if they had built up months of history of comments that proved it, what would it matter if they could be purged instantly? If I linked my main alt, and it got a purge and a ban because someone on the admin team doesn’t like me bringing this up, then I would lose all the credibility I had, if I didn’t back it up in the Internet Wayback Machine like the kbin.social OP did.

So I understand why you might question my credibility, but at the same time, you seem to be bolstering the merit of discussing the issue.

xhci,

deleted_by_author

    •
    AMillionNames,

    That’s true, but the problem goes beyond making a mistake when it also involves how they are handling it. I doubt this would be a problem if they admitted their mistake and if they had apologized and made whatever amends they could. Instead, the user is still banned, lemmy.world/u/InternetTubes , and the reason for the ban no longer shows up on the modlog which also seems to be getting increasingly more empty.

    The only thing that they have going for them regarding this incident is allowing this discussion to go on, but having also been on reddit long enough, I know how well that could easily mean just wait to see how it pans out and see if it goes away.

    skullzarmy,

    mobile margins causing horizontal scroll 😜

    thantik,

    Do not engage in content manipulation such as posting spam content, vote manipulation through using several user accounts or consistently down-voting a user. Vote for the content, not for the person.

    I think all of the different front ends that exist for Lemmy should also take the approach that they don’t display up/downvote buttons on user pages. Is there any way to make this a by-default thing for old.lemmy, etc?

    Xylinna, (edited )
    @Xylinna@lemmy.world avatar

    Currently Lemmy UI doesn’t have that capability however Kbin shows who upvoted. You can also see the number of up/down votes a post has through certain apps such as Memmy.

    Whitehat93875,
    @Whitehat93875@lemmy.world avatar

    Vote manipulation will be tricky to enforce, since votes can come from any Instance due to the whole federation thing, if the user uses the same username on their account it’s easy but if not it can be very difficult if not impossible.

    unreasonabro,

    “vote manipulation” is not a real thing on the internet. Nobody is being elected to a position of power. Ergo the conditions required for the word to apply do not exist. The reason is not there. Having your post at the top of a web page for an hour is not equivalent to four years of direct influence upon policy.

    Concluding that a couple extra updoots on a post merits deletion of someone’s identity is more obviously bad behaviour than the problem it attempts to address, which is no problem at all.

    Why are we copycatting the place everyone is trying to get away from?

    davis,

    This is a weird take. You’re strawmanning hard here. Who was attempting to equate real life election fraud and vote manipulation? Completely separate things.

    Also, vote manipulation is bad and should be avoided where possible. It undermines the purpose of voting, which is to allow users to determine what good content is. If vote manipulation is allowed, someone could decide that their content is good all on their own.

    unreasonabro, (edited )

    Friend, we’ve imported a term from democracy to strawman with. You’re familiar with the concept, therefore surely you can see that! The strawman IS the term from democracy, imported to lend significance to an insignificant act nobody actually does. YOU just used the strawman. If we gave the thing its own name it would not have the weight it seems to have now. Bots are a different problem, no real human does this thing by hand to any impactful degree. IT IS NOT A REAL THING and if anybody actually did it it would be pathetic, but certainly not a crime worthy of punishment.

    Again, why import the failed model’s rules? It’s a made up problem, borrowing a name from a sphere of actual significance, to lend it credence so as to be a dick to people.

    Just fuck off with all that noise, you know? (Not you personally.) The crime is not important enough to merit identity theft - or, oh dear, is that term too extreme to fit the situation too?

    GreyEyedGhost,

    There were literally well-respected users who did this to garner admittedly pointless influence and suffered backlash because of it. Acting like people wouldn’t do this when we have seen it done is really bizarre. And your hyperbole makes it even harder to take your stance seriously.

    BolexForSoup,
    BolexForSoup avatar

    Unidan

    GreyEyedGhost,

    That’s the one!

    BolexForSoup,
    BolexForSoup avatar

    Got you fam

    BitingChaos,
    @BitingChaos@lemmy.world avatar

    joke’s on you. i can’t read

    NightAuthor,

    I don’t think a TTL of 5 minutes is typical, also, if the servers are all located in the US, wouldn’t US law apply?

    clueless_stoner,

    Only if they were.

    TimewornTraveler,

    You really expect me, your average idiot, to read a legal document to learn the rules and abide by them?

    IzzyData,
    @IzzyData@lemmy.ml avatar

    Don’t worry. They won’t abide by them either.

    ninekeysdown,
    @ninekeysdown@lemmy.world avatar

    It’s not hard to read and it’s pretty clear. IMHO it’s better than most ELUA text I’ve seen.

    Besides with the scale at which this site is growing it would be STUPID of them NOT to put up something like this. At the bare minimum it’s protecting their asses from liability if/when someone decides to sue them. They can’t point to that text and say this is what/why we took the actions we did.

    Damaskox,
    @Damaskox@lemmy.world avatar

    I trust in the Golden Rule, and my behavior within carries me to victory!

    I trust that the Golden Rule will be “enough the same” - compared to the given rules here - so that I will not break any rules!

    TimewornTraveler,

    Yes! Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe, the more often and steadily we reflect upon them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me.

    Boiglenoight,

    No problem. 👍

    InternetTubes,

    I've given lemmy.world the benefit of a doubt, but since they've made their stance clear, I'd like to warn the fellow kbin.social users who can still view this comment of the following: https://kbin.social/m/RedditMigration/t/554307/Just-wanted-a-warning-Lemmy-World-is-perhaps-worse-than-reddit

    Basically, they don't even follow the examples they set in their Terms of Service and will not only ban but purge your entire comment account on a whim because they didn't like the criticism they said they were open to on a post stating that "users may express their questions, concerns, requests and issues regarding the Terms of Service, and content moderation in Lemmy.World." There's no doubt, they were pretty clear they considered the criticism "disagreeing with the terms of service".

    Create your user on another instance and save yourself from this abuse, if kbin.social is just your alt and you have a lemmy.world main.

    BolexForSoup, (edited )
    BolexForSoup avatar

    As a kbin user this is very interesting indeed

    HardlightCereal,

    I see you removed the rules against transphobia and clarified that content can’t be reported if it’s not against the new rules. That sucks

    clueless_stoner,

    Every one of our users has a right to browse and interact with the website and all of its contents free of treatment such as harassment, bullying, violation of privacy or threats of violence.

    Why would we need to spell out every form of these acts? Curious.

    Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever, (edited )

    “I’m not insulting you specifically. I am just saying that I think all jewish people are secretly space aliens who eat children” and so forth. It is not bullying because it is not specifically targeting a user. There is no violation of privacy and they held short of talking about what they want to do to that ethnic group. And “harassment” is incredibly nebulous

    In a good faith interaction: Common sense prevails and that is flagged under the spirit of the rule (even if I am not sure if I agree that IS against the spirit of it). But you specify stuff like this to remove any ambiguity. Largely for the same reasons you have a TOS/COC to begin with. Wheaton’s Rule was “sufficient” for small message boards back before any of us really cared about bigotry. But even that was largely replaced with real rules the moment the user count broke the hundred mark.

    But also? The world is a really shitty place where the best you can generally hope for is that social media is only kind of racist and hateful (oh reddit) rather than being run by literal white supremacists. Text about discrimination goes a long way toward saying “Hey, we are at least trying”.

    So is the thinking that a catch all 5.0.1 sufficient? Or will there be restoration of specific rules against discrimination based on ethnicity, religion, sexuality, etc.

    leraje,
    @leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    That statement is a bit like someone saying ‘all lives matter’ in response to people saying ‘black lives matter’ after another black person is gunned down.

    wildginger,

    Did you guys talk to a lawyer before doing this? Cause I think a lawyer would explain to you exactly why.

    You probably should have talked to a lawyer before trying to draft up a legal document.

    fiat_lux,

    For what I expect are similar reasons the list of forbidden image and text content gets so detailed:

    5.0.6: No visual content depicting executions, murder, suicide, dismemberment, visible innards, excessive gore, or charred bodies. No content depicting, promoting or enabling animal abuse. No erotic or otherwise suggestive media or text content featuring depictions of rape, sexual assault, or non-consensual violence. All other violent content requires a NSFW tag.

    I now know from this list that posting Hieronymus Bosch's "The Garden of Earthly Delights" would be problematic even though it wouldn't occur to me that medieval illustrations of fictional torture would break the rules. And I now no longer know whether this instance considers the usage of variously themed slurs as against the rules, especially in contexts where they're not direct personal user attacks.

    What is socially acceptable obviously varies widely from culture to culture, and definitely instance to instance. The brief list from the previous version helped me to identify the overall culture of the instance to figure out if I would be welcome here. Now instead I'm just not sure if a sweet Aztec decorated human skull from c. 1350CE is allowed because it is half literal human remains, half turquoise, haematite and gold mosaic.

    I appreciate that finding the balance here is very difficult. It may just be because it's late and I'm tired, but I feel less certain about what the expectations are with this version than I did the previous. I hope you will consider returning a bit more detail to section 5.

    BolexForSoup, (edited )
    BolexForSoup avatar

    It appears you lifted then edited parts of Reddit's TOS for your own (which to be clear is totally fine and a smart way to make one).

    Every one of our users has a right to browse and interact with the website and all of its contents free of treatment such as harassment, bullying, violation of privacy or threats of violence. [LW]

    Everyone has a right to use Reddit free of harassment, bullying, and threats of violence. [Reddit]

    But then y'all dropped the very next sentence from reddit's:

    Communities and people that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.

    Nobody said you have to spell each case out. We have plenty of examples to draw from and I feel like that one line is a great example.

    BendyLemmy,
    @BendyLemmy@lemmy.world avatar

    Should there also be entries to cover Ginger, Blonde, Black, or a million other specific labels which could be targeted?

    Isn’t singling out Transphobia a form of predjudice? Shouild we also add to the list a few thousand other terms which some people find ‘edgy’?

    leraje,
    @leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    There are very obviously groups of people who are targeted for violence, threats, harassment and abuse based solely on who they are. Ginger, blonde and black haired people don’t experience this.

    By making it explicit in a ToS or set of rules that attacking these groups of people is against the rules, the Admins could’ve made those users feel just a little bit safer and welcome on their server. Removing those explicit rules makes them, by contrast, feel unsafer and less welcome. That’s one of things .world admin team have achieved with this change.

    Xylinna,
    @Xylinna@lemmy.world avatar

    This is an understandable concern and was certainly not the intent to make users feel unsafe or less welcome. We are going to look at adding something to cover this.

    leraje,
    @leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    That’s good to hear.

    lvxferre,
    @lvxferre@lemmy.ml avatar

    I’m not subscribed to lemmy.world but I got a proposal on a way to handle this. Here it is:

    5.0.1: Before and when using the website, remember you will be interacting with actual, real people and communities. You cannot use Lemmy.World to attack other groups of people, regardless of their sex, sexuality and gender, ethnicity and race, country of origin and residence, religious affiliation or lack of, etc. Every one of our users has a right to browse and interact with the website and all of its contents free of treatment such as harassment, bullying, violation of privacy or threats of violence.

    I believe that this should be enough to clarify to those most people that no, bigotry is not allowed in your instance.

    leraje,
    @leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    I think that’s good but protecting religion is questionable to me. I’m not saying its OK to attack people based on their religion but religion isn’t a property of a person in the way their ethnicity or sexuality is, it’s merely an opinion someone holds. If your wording is adopted, it’d be nice to see the difference between attacking who someone is and an opinion someone holds made clear.

    Also needs to reference (dis)ability IMO.

    lvxferre,
    @lvxferre@lemmy.ml avatar

    The groups listed as example (notice the “etc.”) are up to the admins, I’m suggesting mostly how to word it. It’s easy to include/exclude one if they so desire.

    That said, I do think that “religious affiliation or lack of” should be included. It might boil down to opinions + a bunch of epistemic statements, but it’s consistently a source of persecution.

    If your wording is adopted, it’d be nice to see the difference between attacking who someone is and an opinion someone holds made clear.

    Personally I believe that this is usually easy - you look at the target of the claim. For example:

    • “[religion] is full of bullshit” - probably attacking the opinions or epistemic claims, thus probably fine
    • "[religion] is full of arseholes" - unless contextualised otherwise, probably attacking the individuals there, thus probably not fine

    This is also up to the admins here though, not me.

    Also needs to reference (dis)ability IMO.

    I understand where you’re coming from with this, but note that complains about ableism, in social media, are often shielding abled people against criticism, not disabled people from prejudice. Stuff like:

    • [Alice] Bob! You’re being a moron. Don’t do this.
    • [Bob] Alice dis is ableism!
    Aux,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    leraje,
    @leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    It’s not clear what you’re saying? Are you saying transphobes are misogynists?

    Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever,

    Nobody is saying transphobia specifically needs to be called out*.

    It is more just actually calling out discrimination. I ANAL (and am not a lawyer) but general catch alls like “No discrimination based on the grounds of gender, sexuality, ethnicity, nationality, age, or religion”. Transphobia comes under a mix of gender and sexuality.

    But also: When you are dealing with a TOS, you get a lawyer involved (which is another clear issue with this but…) rather than going by what some dude on the internet vaguely recalls of some documentation they read a few months back.

    *: Although, there is an argument that hatred toward the trans community has reached the point that it is worth a call out

    Lemminary, (edited )

    Should there also be entries to cover … a million other specific labels

    Is there significant and active discrimination happening to those “millions” of other specific labels where people show up dead on the news in the majority of countries and that exhibit targeted hatred online? Can you point out a single example for a ginger or a blonde being killed because of the color of their hair? Are there statistics about this from various countries?

    singling out Transphobia a form of predjudice

    No, that’s very disingenuous and sounds like rhetoric someone would use to ease up the rules about transphobia. I’d argue that what you’re doing is a form of semantic manipulation.

    DarkThoughts,

    5.1: The content provided on Lemmy.World is not necessarily factually true, and hosting it does not mean agreeing, supporting or encouraging it. We only require all content fully comply with the Terms of Service and any other documents that are mentioned and linked to in this document.

    So Lemmy.world is just as good as Lemmy.ml & Lemmygrad etc?

    Dremor,
    @Dremor@lemmy.world avatar

    Just that lemmy.world can’t have a team of full time fact checkers, so we have to be adults and do our own research.

    DarkThoughts,

    That sounds more like a cop out though. Like not having to moderate blatant disinformation, which is exactly what happens on the mentioned instances.

    Dremor,
    @Dremor@lemmy.world avatar

    As a community moderator (c/games) we try to.
    Not so long ago we got a topic on Chinese games that ended up in a cesspool of sinophobia.
    I did what I could to clean up the blatant insults from both side while mostly keeping the interesting part, but spent probably two days keeping an eye on it to prevent it from degenerating again 😅.

    The problem is in such a case that both sides believe in their side of the truth and refuse to acknowledge that the other side got some good points too.

    By keeping moderation from having to be the judge, jury, and executioner, we hope to provide a common ground on which all parties can debate. Moderation is here to keep baseless insults somewhat at bay, and keep illegal content out of our instance.

    BolexForSoup, (edited )
    BolexForSoup avatar

    As mods it’s our “jobs” to be judge, jury, and executioner. People are not entitled to “all opinions are valid” debates and whatnot. If they are disruptive, i kick them. I don’t care if they know the rules backwards and forwards and find a narrow lane that is vaguely justifiable and I don’t care what their politics or points are, frankly. I’m not running a debate club. If the community clearly finds you disruptive or you’re starting shit I show you the door. We can’t be afraid to protect our communities from disruptive/bad actors to some degree out of misguided moral imperative to provide a megaphone for debates.

    DarkThoughts,

    Examples like this are of course hard for me to judge from the outside. Is boycotting China as much as possible because of their government sinophobic already?
    I'm talking about proper disinformation & extremistic comments, like genocide apologists, calls for violence and such. I think there's things we can agree to disagree on, and things that just shouldn't have a place at all on any sort of social media, because of their fundamentally destructive nature to our societies.

    frequenttimetraveler,
    @frequenttimetraveler@lemmy.world avatar

    The website and the agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the Republic of Finland Suomen.

    Where are you guys based? Ultimately there is only one legal jurisdiction that applies here

    NightAuthor,

    The domain is registered in Netherlands, but all the server IPs seem to be located in the US. Not that IP localization is always accurate (I’m actually not sure how it works at all)

    LufyCZ,

    Could be Cloudflare?

    NightAuthor,

    Hmm… I wonder if cloudflare servers in the US would subject a website to US laws. Maybe for only certain types of content? Or does any content passing through the… well any country… subject it to that lands laws.

    leraje,
    @leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    I believe it transpired awhile ago that the servers are physically located in Finland but they do use CloudFlare. As such, I would assume (as oppose to know) that the legality rests on Finnish law. CloudFlare’s responsibilities are often tested but there does seem to be a large grey area. This is an interesting read concerning German law on DNS resolvers in general and CloudFlare in particular.

    NightAuthor,

    Yeah, it is an interesting legal topic. I saw this case where cloudflare was deemed not responsible in an instance of copyright infringement. I guess ultimately that’s up to cloudflare and the countries they operate in to deal with.

    leraje,
    @leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    It does feel like DNS resolvers are the next battleground. I can’t remember the provider (NextDNS maybe?) but a DNS resolver was threatened by several very large media companies that they would sue if the provider didn’t block resolution to pirate sites. The provider caved IIRC.

    CloudFlare might have deep enough pockets to take on Sony/Disney or even EU law but the smaller providers certainly don’t.

    DillyDaily,

    Thank you for asking this, the part about users not using LW for illegal activities is also unclear to me, is it an illegal activity in my country where I’m posting from, or an illegal activity where LW is registered. For example, being gay might be illegal where I live, it won’t stop me accessing queer communities online.

    That’s an obvious situation for me, because it’s such an unjust law, but a more vague example might be an 18 year old in the USA and and 18 year old in Australia discussing the consumption of alcohol and how to make homebrew. One of those people are breaking local laws. In the grand scheme of things this is a relatively harmless situation, but would this technology be a violation of the T&S?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • lemmyworld@lemmy.world
  • kavyap
  • InstantRegret
  • ethstaker
  • DreamBathrooms
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • tacticalgear
  • slotface
  • Durango
  • khanakhh
  • rosin
  • everett
  • Leos
  • vwfavf
  • normalnudes
  • osvaldo12
  • cubers
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cisconetworking
  • ngwrru68w68
  • anitta
  • provamag3
  • tester
  • modclub
  • megavids
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines
    •