By removing specific the list of unacceptable behavior, they are implicitly allowing it.

That’s a wild take.

This is how it read before: “Don’t be an asshole, for example insulting people for no reason.

This is how it reads now: “Don’t be an asshole.

Insulting is still not fine. Insulting is not “implicitly allowed” now. Isn’t that straightforward and obvious?

@wraptile
banned
11
edit-2
9M

Man what sort of person you have to be to go to such great lengths of effort and mental gymnastics to come to these conclusions just so you could feel offended. They even explicitly state that:

This Code of Conduct is adapted from the Community Covenant, The only change made was to remove the list of examples in the interest of readability.

Trolls, have evolved and we are all falling for it.

@mFcGlNBcfr
79M

I mean, when I read

We do not tolerate harassment of participants in any form.

I generally believe that they don’t tolerate harassment of participants in any form.

If anything, the net to reject harassment is even wider than before.

@nutomic
admin
59M

They also removed the report funcionality in their version of Mastodon. Action speaks louder than words.

@wraptile
banned
59M

That seems like an actual thing to complain about not the original post rubbish. Do you have more info on this?

@nutomic
admin
39M

They hired Eugen to do it, was posted on Mastodon at the time. No idea where to find the info now. And they might have enabled reports again since then.

@wraptile
banned
4
edit-2
9M

Well that just seems like they had some technical difficulties and you make it sound all nefarious as in “they disabled it to protect white supremacists”

@nutomic
admin
29M

They disabled the report feature and told people that its a freeze peach instance. What is that if not protecting white supremacists?

@wraptile
banned
19M

They disabled the feature and then asked mastodon lead dev to enable it? I’m sorry but can you provide some coherent sources here because nothing makes sense. I get it that it might be a sensitive subject for you but if you want to throw someone under a bus like that you should at least put some effort into it.

@nutomic
admin
49M

No, they hired the Mastodon lead dev to disable the report feature in their version of Mastodon. This is all I could find cause the Mastodon search sucks.

https://mastodon.social/@Gargron/102180970932210065

@wraptile
banned
39M

Can’t see any of your claims in that thread. Seems like a bunch of hearsay and vague head nodding, could you point to specifics?

Actually this is exactly what’s wrong with Mastodon as a platform and community — everyone’s write ups are so lazy.
Constant carelessness and vagueness is core of “discussions” of mastodon.social. I think it’s a clear issue with culture and absolute lack of formatting. If you for example compare it to reddit or even Lemmy you can see that the availability to freely express yourself through unrestricted pot length and proper formatting promotes much more structured and healthy discourse.

Everyday I wonder how mastodon won over diaspora which was a much better platform although a bit buggy and clunky. It allowed:

  • Full markdown formatting
  • Tag driven engagement subscriptions rather than following personalities: core principle of healthy society is following of ideas not people.

Finally it’s sad that people are so sheepish and so quick to jump to conclusion while being to lazy to argue their case in a proper and extended fashion.

@nutomic
admin
29M

There was a lot of discussion about it at the time, but thats really hard to find now. So either believe it or dont.

And yes, Mastodon is fundamentally a different type of platform compared to something like Lemmy. You dont have to like it, but that doesnt mean its inherently bad.

@wraptile
banned
49M

So you asks people on pure faith and hearsay to condemn someone as a nazi racist? 🤔

@Stoned_Ape
19M

Why do you think it protects this particular group, but not others? Or is this just an example, and any malicious group is allegedly protected?

@nutomic
admin
0
edit-2
9M

Because the United States is a white supremacist country, from the day it was founded. So if you defer to its laws, you follow rules written by white supremacists.

@Stoned_Ape
19M

I’m sorry if I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying. Can you please specify which rule you are referring to? Are you saying that the rules of the Mastodon instance of Purism was written by “white supremacists”?

@ksynwa
11
edit-2
9M

For the record, I used to be a free speech absolutist myself.

That was true for me too. “Free speech” is usually portrayed as an innocuous privilege to be able to criticise sensitive issues, which I thought was reasonable, but then in real life it is used only by weird Nazis to play victim.

Regarding the phone, it will be their downfall IMO. People are willing to tolerate inadequacies in hardware and software, which will most definitely be there at launch, especially when a project is as bold as this but Purism will lose a lot of support over this.

this part really got under my skin

It’s not like it was unreadable they just want to either stop moderating or allow neo nazis. There was no reason to do that. The most important part of any open source project is the community, and they are actively throwing that away for no good reason.

@Stoned_Ape
69M

Why should give a long list of examples, if they use language to include all of those examples and more with a simple phrasing? All of those things in the list are still against the code, so nothing really changed. Or is there a good reason to think otherwise?

@wraptile
banned
-29M

What a ridiculous claim. You’re aware of what abstraction is right?

@RandomSovietKid
4
edit-2
13d

deleted by creator

@Stoned_Ape
49M

But what would be the solution to this? To literally state any way you can harass a human being and assemble this into a list?

@nutomic
admin
29M

Why not, Mastodon manages that in just six lines.

@Stoned_Ape
3
edit-2
9M

I just looked at the CoC of mastodon.social, and I don’t see 6 lines there. Which ones do you mean? Those 5 items?

The following types of content will be removed from the public timeline, and may result in account suspension and revocation of access to the service:

  • Racism or advocation of racism
  • Sexism or advocation of sexism
  • Casteism or advocation of casteism
  • Discrimination against gender and sexual minorities, or advocation thereof
  • Xenophobic and/or violent nationalism
@nutomic
admin
19M

I mean the ones in this image that was linked above:

@Stoned_Ape
49M

Does that list really include literally any way to harass other people? What about personal taste of anything - food, music, colors, anything? What about profession? Or choice of programming language? What about things like autism, which is not always a disability if you ask me (I’m on the spectrum)? What about illnesses? What about… any other thing that humans can think of to make another human being feel bad? Sadly, there are a lot of things.

Of course, if you harass a person with these kind of attacks, you’ll get problems with any decent moderator, with or without that list. But if that is so, why do we need the list?

Personally, I don’t have anything about the list above. But I could also do without it.

@nutomic
admin
39M

There is no systematic oppression of people based on food or music choice, so why should that be included?

And honestly, whats the point of your comment? Does it hurt you in any way if those things are listed? Good for you if you can do without them, but thats easy to say if you are white and cisgender.

@wraptile
banned
5
edit-2
9M

Lol at this point I’m really tempted to start a swarm of bots that harass people by “things that aren’t on the list” just to illustrate how wrong you are 🤣

The point of the whole idea of purism that simple is better than complex - this has been core of philosophy and design for centuries.

How can you so oblivious for such a simple idea? You write “no littering” not “we forbid literring of: cans, bottles, paper wraps…”

@Stoned_Ape
39M

There is no systematic oppression of people based on food or music choice, so why should that be included?

Well, some people are getting really awful around music tastes like hip hop, Schlager music (I have no idea what the fitting word in English is), or even classical music. Maybe our definitions of “systematic oppression” is different.

And honestly, whats the point of your comment?

To talk about a useful and fair COC that is easy to read and understand.

Does it hurt you in any way if those things are listed?

As I said: No.

Good for you if you can do without them, but thats easy to say if you are white and cisgender.

I’m just a human being, and my actual skin color (which is definitely not “white”) and my sexual organs and preferences don’t matter for what we are discussing right now. I strongly suggest that you think about what you just said to me. Because if you ask me, you’re using the things in that list to form an argument against my view. If you ask me, you are breaking these rules right now.

If my interpretation is not the way you meant it, then I’d like to stand corrected.

@RandomSovietKid
1
edit-2
13d

deleted by creator

@Stoned_Ape
2
edit-2
9M

You don’t seem understand what systematic oppression is. A few people are going to act awful based on anything, be it music taste or whatever. Systematic oppression is when the system, when most institutions deny you something based on these characteristics.

I agree with this definition of systematic oppression. That’s how I understood it while talking about this topic.

If your problem is that it seems to exclude harassment based on other characteristics that don’t experience systematic oppression:

That is not a problem for me, because I agree with you that any harassment of any kind is already covered.

Which is exactly the point. That is exactly the whole point of this. Why have a list when it is redundant? On top of that, there are in fact many lists out there that make exclusions, be it intentionally or unintentionally.

Just simply “Don’t harass anyone.” is sufficient and, as you correctly state, covers everything.

And I can’t imagine that reading that one paragraph listing inacceptable behaviour was too hard for you

You are absolutely right. It’s not about the text being “too hard” for me or anybody else. That is not at all what I’m talking about. Being simple, straightforward and easy to read is not a polar opposite of “too hard to read”, nor does it mean “dumbing it down for stupid people”.

@RandomSovietKid
7
edit-2
13d

deleted by creator

@wraptile
banned
2
edit-2
9M

I’m kinda on the edge regarding this subject. Mastodon is definitely waaaay to sensitive. I got shadow-banned from mastodon.social because I replied to lady telling me to “shut the fuck up” because apparently using @someone is against the rules if they “asked” not to be mentioned. On the other hand it’s really hard to value bigot opinions and messages, so might as well clean up the trash.

I can definitely understand Purism’s stance here. It’s better to define a strict rule rather than deal with this drama, micro-management and constant trolls. “say what you want, as long as you don’t harass anyone and it’s not illegal we don’t care, use block feature” I think is a good moto for project’s sanity.

We’ve been seeing a lot of this social justice trolling to the point where running a public project is becoming extremely difficult.
4Chan turning ancient greek “OK sign” to racist symbol to the point where it’s getting removed, programming terms black/white lists that exists for over a millennia are being replaced etc. etc.

I guess what I’m saying is that in this climate Purism’s stance is very attractive, agreeable and aligns with their main philosophy of privacy and liberty.

Edit: Now that I write this out, I’m totally with Purism here.

Any conduct intended to stalk or harass other users, or to impede other users from utilizing the service, or to degrade the performance of the service, or to harass other users, or to incite other users to perform any of the aforementioned actions, is also disallowed, and subject to punishment up to and including revocation of access to the service. This includes, but is not limited to, the following behaviors:

Continuing to engage in conversation with a user that has specifically has requested for said engagement with that user to cease and desist may be considered harassment, regardless of platform-specific privacy tools employed.

So you broke the rules. It’s not your server on mastodon.social. You don’t make the rules there, just because you think “say what you want, as long as you don’t harass anyone and it’s not illegal we don’t care, use block feature” are good rules that doesn’t mean you can just not follow the rules of a server.

Go and join one of the many servers that have different rules and different communities which were shaped by those rules. But on mastodon.social you will follow the rules that are set by the owners, just like you will on lemmy.ml.

@wraptile
banned
1
edit-2
9M

So you broke the rules.

I’m sorry but this is absurd. First to assume that “shut the fuck up” is some sort of indication to cease engagement is absurd to say the least.

I don’t really appreciate your condescending tone either. You appear to be a perfect illustration of my point regarding absurd and abusive over-moderation that has negative value on everyone involved.
Just click the bloody block button, it’s much easier than to ask someone to stop engaging — grow up. To me it seems like this sort of moderation actually encourages conflict and negative discourse rather than the opposite.

Also let me be clear, most people on mastodon.social don’t feel overpoliced apparently or they would look for a different server… So maybe you are the only one with a problem here.

@wraptile
banned
19M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

mastodon.social is notorious instance to the point where it impacts mastodon project and activitypub as a whole. Even mastodon of .social is starting to slowly realize this by closing registrations and taking it off priority listing on joinmastodon.
Just google mastodon discussions on hacker news or any other social network to get a picture.

@nutomic
admin
69M

Registrations are closed because there are too many users already. Eugen is opening a new instance though (likely with the same rules).

@wraptile
banned
-49M

Too many users in what extent? The server fails to scale or the instance is absolute unmanageable chaos? Maybe instead of spawning another horror show the current administration should start cleaning up the current mess.

I said it million times and I’ll say it again. The only reason why Mastodon failed to take on twitter even while being a better product and having mostly better community is mastodon.social. That instance should have been closed long time ago and all of the cancer that is in it. The benefits of federated communities is that it prevents massive centralized echo chambers and mastodon.social is exactly that.

If you browse trending tags all of the drama always comes from mastodon.social. If you browse all negative reviews that come of mastodon all of them are of mastodon.social. It’s an unavoidable pattern and if you really think there’s nothing wrong with .social then you might as well cover your ears and repeatedly mutter “blah blah blah”.

@abbenm
69M

Too many users in what extent? The server fails to scale or the instance is absolute unmanageable chaos? Maybe instead of spawning another horror show the current administration should start cleaning up the current mess.

You don’t know what you are talking about. Mastodon has been designed from day one to be a federated social network. This is to solve the problem social networks being centralized on a single server.

Mastodon.social became the de-facto server that everyone joined, creating a problem of centralization. So, over the years, mastodon.social has periodically closed registration and encouraged people to look at other servers, so that the userbase can be more distributed and the federation made more strong.

The latest effort is again, to encourage users to spread out across the federation.

@wraptile
banned
-2
edit-2
9M

lol, you just accidentally agree with me? My claim is that .social is unhealthy because it’s too centralized and you’re saying mastodon.social is closing registrations because centralization is unhealthy 🤣

@abbenm
49M

You were all over the map, variously speculating that it was excessive demands of their moderation policies (false), their exclusive echo chamber (false), that their server couldn’t scale (false) and now that you hear that it’s about the mission of federation, you are claiming that that’s what you meant the whole time, even though it has nothing to do with your original argument about it supposedly being an overpoliced echo chamber.

@wraptile
banned
09M

You’re saying false as it’s a fact. In my opinion it’s not false at all. People don’t like mastodon.social and for good reason. It’s like you’re living under a rock lol

@abbenm
4
edit-2
9M

It is a fact. The reason it was closed was because Eugen wanted registrations spread out across other servers on the fediverse to advance the project of federation. And he has closed it multiple times in the past with the stated reason of wanting people to spread out to more servers. Which has nothing to do with your claims about it supposedly being overpoliced.

Also, you were just saying I was agreeing with you. Do you now understand that I was not agreeing with you at all, and that mastodon closed registrations for reasons that have nothing to do with your argument about moderation?

@couldbeanybody
5
edit-2
9M

The server fails to scale or the instance is absolute unmanageable chaos? Maybe instead of spawning another horror show the current administration should start cleaning up the current mess.

Whaaaaat? Are you serious? lmao

The benefits of federated communities is that it prevents massive centralized echo chambers and mastodon.social is exactly that.

The benefit is the freedom from tracking, no advertising, free software and the ability to make the rules and change the code as a community as fits.

What point are you trying to make here, I genuinely don’t understand.

I totally agree that there are people who probably don’t feel welcome on mastodon.social.

@abbenm
-1
edit-2
9M

Oh boy, this really has all the greatest hits:

✔️ naiive defense of free speech

✔️ citing wikipedia articles with logical fallacies

✔️ extremely basic misunderstanding of why mastodon.social is closed for registration

✔️ tone trolling

These are not some of my favorite things. And they are so, so predictable coming from free speech truthers who appear to be completely oblivious to how free speech arguments have been weaponized to enable harassment and trolling.

@wraptile
banned
1
edit-2
9M

Oh boy, this really has all the greatest hits:

✔ inability to read
✔ inability to refute anything I said
✔ ad hominem attack

wow, you proved me wrong, hadn’t you!

I think major problem here is that people aren’t aware of the simple concept of abstraction. Racism falls under “harassment”

The argument isn’t about “free speech truthing” if you put half the effort into reading and comprehension instead of writing these troll posts you’ll get that. The argument is that defining static abstract rules is superior to defining granular rules that are open to all sorts of ridiculous interpretations and abuse. i.e. it’s better to say “no to harassment” then to split it out to a million different culturally charged and open to interpret rules.
“No Nazis” What about communists, capitalists? Surely in some cultural contexts one is much much more offensive than the other. Where do you stop, do you just keep tackling on more and more rules to the point where you release a book with your social instance? Or you be an adult and abstract the rules and have adult moderation.

So how about you stop appeal to emotion and ad hominem and instead learn to read and hold a proper discourse.

@abbenm
29M

Basically all of your characterizations of me ‘misreading’ are inaccurate. I’m perfectly aware of the distinction you think you’re making between strict/abstract moderation. It’s not that I’m ‘misreading’ that so much as consciously rejecting that idea of how to moderate as thoroughly inadequate to the task of dealing with modern harassment and trolling as it exists on the internet in 2020. It’s not a problem with rules, it’s a problem with culture. Rules don’t fix cultural problems. Online harassment may legitimately be described as an actual crisis in need of fixing. Your breezy, carefree attitude, demanding people ‘grow up’ is characteristic of the cultural problem of free speech trutherism. The reasons are laid out pretty well in the article.

wow, you proved me wrong, hadn’t you!

I mean, firstly, you really did give a completely inaccurate characterization of why mastodon.social is closed for registration. That is not a misread. That is not trolling. That is a correct description of a thing that you did. Also, you really did tone troll. And you really did cite a wikipedia article about logical fallacy. And you gave the bog-standard naiive defense of free speech that’s characteristic of free speech trutherism. Flagging those and identifying them for what they are is a legitimate way to bring light to pitfalls in your argument.

“No Nazis” What about communists, capitalists?

That’s called whataboutism. You like arguing by citing wikipedia articles about logical fallacies, right? Please go ahead and acknowledge that this is whataboutism and retract the claim, since you accept that this is a valid way to argue.

So how about you stop appeal to emotion and

Nope. This was not an appeal to emotion. It was not an ad hominem (which isn’t necessarily a fallacy, anyway). It wasn’t a misread. I identified several substantive parts of what you said and pointed out what was wrong with them.

@wraptile
banned
09M

again you show your complete inability to read and yet produce these walls of text.

What protects you more: “we don’t tolerate ANY harassment” or “we don’t tolerate harassment like misogyny, racism, gender discrimination”

Use your brain my dude…

ufra
09M

And they are so, so predictable coming from free speech truthers who appear to be completely oblivious to how free speech arguments have been weaponized to enable harassment and trolling.

speaking of tone …

@abbenm
1
edit-2
9M

Tone trolling is when you find yourself only criticizing the tone of what someone says while disregarding the substance. So, yeah. It’s not a good thing to do.

ufra
-19M

an objective tone seems appropriate

First to assume that “shut the fuck up” is some sort of indication to cease engagement is absurd to say the least.

That’s interesting, what do you think it means?

I don’t really appreciate your condescending tone either.

Sure I get that.

You appear to be a perfect illustration of my point regarding absurd and abusive over-moderation that has negative value on everyone involved.

How though? I was just explaining that you should have read the rules of the server you were using.

Just click the bloody block button, it’s much easier than to ask someone to stop engaging — grow up.

Don’t tell me what to do.

@wraptile
banned
-69M

You seem like a really unpleasant person, in my opinion; sorry but I’ll practice what I preach and block you for now. No hard feelings!

Don’t worry that’s fine.

You just did what you think should be against the rules.

Nowhere did I state the rules I want but sure.

I guess you do know what I am referring to, though.

Not at all. I am following the rules of lemmy.ml, right?

You are not violating any rules here that I know of. Before we continue, lets make sure we’re on the same page: Do you support banning for answering a comment despite the person saying “shut up”?

Do you support banning for answering a comment despite the person saying “shut up”?

Yes, if the rules say “saying shut up is not allowed”. No, if the rules say “say whatever to whomever”.

@Stoned_Ape
29M

That’s fair. Do you think that rule is fine the way it is?

I personally don’t think that “shut up” is sufficient for this kind of thing. I’m not even sure if that rule is a good one, or if it should be more specific. I’m saying this as a person who was pretty much stalked by users in a forum, especially after asking them to stop tagging me in their comments.

I think that you should comment on anything you want, if you contribute to the discussion, even when a person stated that they don’t want you to answer their comments. A forum is a place for everyone, and commenting on everything should be fine.

Though, deliberately stalking should not. Maybe it is not easy to discern from time to time. But that is how it is. There is no easy way to deal with this.

@PopeRigby
-1
edit-2
8M

deleted by creator

@Stoned_Ape
49M

Apologizing for what?

Subscribe to see more stories about technology on your homepage


  • 0 users online
  • 50 users / day
  • 77 users / week
  • 172 users / month
  • 380 users / 6 months
  • 2484 subscribers
  • 996 Posts
  • 2356 Comments
  • Modlog