See longer post (not by me) there, if all is true then they should fall under both the spam and mass lemm.ee rule breaking defederation rules, both bigotry and abusive language, though not always in combination.

Also the covenant thing Mastodon has would probably be a good idea.

  • barsoap@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I do not want to federate with instances which aim to hurt our communities or users, but I need concrete and specific evidence of this before I take drastic action.

    Acting based on evidence is always good and proper. As to relying on reports for that I’m sceptical, though, or better put things aren’t quite there yet: A toxic community might be raiding some instance somewhere, that instance’s users are reporting like crazy, and you see none of it, consequently they could focus on one instance after the other, then change domains, rinse and repeat. Or at least that’s how I think it works (excuse my ignorance), there’s no global space where admins could see all reports. Would you even see a report from a lemm.ee user made in a community of another instance?

    It might be a good idea to have more options in the report dialog, not just because of this, regarding whom to actually report the post to, as well as a drop-down for reasons – a post on beehaw that I report might violate beehaw “be nice” rules, but it might or might not also violate lemm.ee rules so I may or may not want to report it here, too.

    It might also make sense to be able to report not just to mods/admins but specific communities who can then collate evidence and present it to admins (essentially /r/shitXXXsay but better), collating will be important because the harassment can be in the overall interaction pattern of a community, not just individual posts.


    All in all though, to get my head out of the clouds and back into the here and now: Please don’t be too principled as long as the tools and community to back up those principles aren’t in place. That is, err on the side of the banhammer if you see a preponderance of evidence because if you don’t those people are going to strategise around your principles, rules of evidence etc. to do their thing. We’re already seeing that with the “block users who want us gone so they can’t report us” type of tactic.

    Actually that looks like quite a misfeature: Someone blocking me shouldn’t preclude me from seeing their content. Another thing reddit got wrong.

    • SNEWSLEYPIES@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Please don’t be too principled as long as the tools and community to back up those principles aren’t in place.

      I very much agree with this, @sunaurus@lemm.ee - your stance above is, I think, exactly as a stated policy should be, but please do remember that plans and reality must meet somewhere along the way. If you overthink things or cleave too religiously to the rules you’ve set yourself, you risk taking too long to act, and it’s exactly this delay between problem and reaction that bad actors exploit.

      Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face, basically. Lemm.ee is a great instance, and we’d all, I think, love to see it stay that way 🙂