#X's implementation of its latest #moderation decision, to include the term "c*sgender" in their (undoubtedly rancid) collection of swears, curses, and other nasty words, is IMO warranted, as we shouldn't allow the gradual outing of normal persons from an evermore hostile internet.
The main proponents of a successful internet should be its moderation tools. While a manually maintained list is sufficient for most usecases, with the growth and ever increasing need of an #accessible internet, we should also look for inclusion of hateful terms identified by automatic tools, such as sentence sentiment analysis, methinks.
I have to admit I generally enjoy slack. But in any community there are going to be assholes. One thing I dislike about Slack is the inability to #mute or #block people. Yes some of them utterly deserve it, and I don’t think I should have to tolerate their virtriol in the normal course of my day.
So instead I must manually stop myself from reading their words and absorbing their attitude. Because if I speak out about then I’m the jerk.
Interessant, dass eine Institution da jetzt erst drauf kommt. Manche hier wissen das schon seit Jahren.
Weiss auch nicht, aber was neues ist das jetzt nicht. Meta war schon immer ein Höllenloch, wer sich da rumtreibt, lebt einfach hinterm Mond was Content Moderration, Meldemöglichkeiten und Sanktionierungen von Accounts/Postings angeht.
Als Francis Haugen vor dem EU Parlament aussagte, hätten die dort eigtl schon alles wissen können. Da brauchts nicht erst noch ne eigene Untersuchung. Meta ist das Befinden der Nutzer:innen völlig egal, denen gehts halt einfach nur um Profit. 🤷♀️
Je viens de découvrir le principe de "Public Calme" sur Mastodon. Je ne sais pas sur quels critères se repose le principe de calme sur Mastodon mais pourquoi pas 🤔
If you get a #followRequest without your account being locked, the #admins of your #instance have paid attention in advance and warn you about a suspicious account. You can still allow it as a follower, but the one today was indeed extremely suspicious and rubbish.
Friendly reminder: To thank your admins and instance for all their work you can #donate! Find the possibilities on your instance's page. The #Fediverse is #adfree but good #moderation/building instances costs time/money. And - tada:
#MastoAdmin#Moderation approaches:
How to deal with accusations and rumors based on outside drama?
This is a tricky one.
Suppose a user is accused of something that is generally frowned upon or worse. However, this has supposedly happened irl, not in your instance, and also the user has a good track record of being active and generating content that doesn't violate the rules at your instance or other instances. There is also no threat to your userbase (as opposed to, for example, in the case of a doxxer).
What is the best approach?:
1- Suspend the user
2- Kick them out (allow them to migrate away, although this just pushes the problem back to the options below)
3- Let them stay and any disagreeing remote instances suspend the user on their side
4- Let them stay and any disagreeing remote instances suspend your whole instance
IMHO, the only sustainable option is option 3, unless it carries a realistic threat to other users. It's not feasible for small instances to be part-time detectives and unless the content posted itself is problematic or there are other reasons, service mentality should prevail if we don't want to push users to super large instances that don't care.
Any concerned remote users or instances are of course free to block on their side.
A whole instance block is not warranted since the instance itself is not spammy or allowing any problematic content, but merely decides not being capable of making a fair assessment of off-platform rumors.
OC Banning spam accounts
Banning spam accounts on kbin.social is a cumbersome affair....