7 ms·

Yeah, I also think having the option to censor communities in specific is a good way to do it. So you could just choose not to host /c/hatefulcommunity. I'd ima

Yeah, I also think having the option to censor communities in specific is a good way to do it. So you could just choose not to host /c/hatefulcommunity. I'd imagine blocklists and community reputation systems would be created much like what exists with e-mail.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
The generally right way to do this is to put actual censorship on the far side of impossible but give individuals good filtering tools. So then maybe your instance provides a default blocklist, but if something gets blocked, it isn't just silently invisible, it shows up as a collapsed comment that you can unfurl or a warning page that you can click through if you really want to. And if you don't agree with an entry your instance added by default, you can strike that one out and choose to always see it. The key is to never let anything like a central party impose censorship that can't be overruled by the user, but still allow them to filter out 99% of the crap by default.
- nickorlow 3y ago
  Yeah, Polycentric lets server operators choose to censor individual posts or entire users. Your client can query anything that's censored from one server by querying it from another where the content was published. It's fairly easy to tell when a post is censored since each post has a logical clock per user that is incremented per post, so you can pick out any missing logical clock entries.
willi59549879 3y ago
i quite like how censoring is done in the fediverse. there is no censoring but each user can chose to block content from showing up in the client. i don't like the idea of censoring. some authority decides what other people are allowed to see.
- nickorlow 3y ago
  I like it in principal, but I think it's hard to keep up with spam in a manner like this.
- tsimionescu 3y ago
  How does a user choose to block content without seeing it, say in order to avoid seeing gore videos from war zones or such?
- Gareth321 3y ago
  Sadly Lemmy’s implementation is quite poor. The owner of each instance can choose which other instances to federate with. So shortly after the Reddit exodus, many are already forming tight ideological bubbles. For example, Beehaw defederated with almost every other instance because they want an ideological safe space. This despite the fact that the protocol already gives individuals plenty of tools to block and avoid users and communities they don’t like. So there is a strong push to control the experience for all users in an instance, instead of allowing individuals that control. And I see a lot of support for this model in other, “less” authoritarian instances like lemmy.world. I think many people are just very authoritarian today, and don’t appreciate the internet as we knew it 20 years ago. They’re not content to control how they interact with the internet. They want to control how everyone interacts.
  - Semaphor 3y ago
    Beehaw did not do that. They defederated 2 large ones because of open sign ups, and Lemmy not having other modding/admin tools available yet
    - Gareth321 3y ago
      That was the claim, but it’s clearly a lie. First, they’ve defederated with and blocked hundreds of instances, not two. It looks like close to 1,000. You can review yourself here: https://beehaw.org/instances https://beehaw.org/instances Second, it appears they have even more moderators than the instances with which they defederated. More than enough to keep illegal content off the instance. But that’s not the intended goal. They want content off the instance which is ideologically opposed to the owner. They make that clear in the instance description. They want more moderation than Reddit, which is already filled with insular ideological spaces. The users are all very much on board with this ideological purity. They freely admit it, so I’m not sure why you would contend it.
      - Semaphor 3y ago
        > It looks like close to 1,000 It’s 400. Versus over 3000 linked instances. That does not sound like an insanely long list, considering how many spam instances there are and those with questionable content.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

The generally right way to do this is to put actual censorship on the far side of impossible but give individuals good filtering tools. So then maybe your instance provides a default blocklist, but if something gets blocked, it isn't just silently invisible, it shows up as a collapsed comment that you can unfurl or a warning page that you can click through if you really want to. And if you don't agree with an entry your instance added by default, you can strike that one out and choose to always see it. The key is to never let anything like a central party impose censorship that can't be overruled by the user, but still allow them to filter out 99% of the crap by default.

nickorlow 3y ago
Yeah, Polycentric lets server operators choose to censor individual posts or entire users. Your client can query anything that's censored from one server by querying it from another where the content was published. It's fairly easy to tell when a post is censored since each post has a logical clock per user that is incremented per post, so you can pick out any missing logical clock entries.

willi59549879 3y ago

i quite like how censoring is done in the fediverse. there is no censoring but each user can chose to block content from showing up in the client. i don't like the idea of censoring. some authority decides what other people are allowed to see.

nickorlow 3y ago
I like it in principal, but I think it's hard to keep up with spam in a manner like this.
tsimionescu 3y ago
How does a user choose to block content without seeing it, say in order to avoid seeing gore videos from war zones or such?
Gareth321 3y ago
Sadly Lemmy’s implementation is quite poor. The owner of each instance can choose which other instances to federate with. So shortly after the Reddit exodus, many are already forming tight ideological bubbles. For example, Beehaw defederated with almost every other instance because they want an ideological safe space. This despite the fact that the protocol already gives individuals plenty of tools to block and avoid users and communities they don’t like. So there is a strong push to control the experience for all users in an instance, instead of allowing individuals that control. And I see a lot of support for this model in other, “less” authoritarian instances like lemmy.world. I think many people are just very authoritarian today, and don’t appreciate the internet as we knew it 20 years ago. They’re not content to control how they interact with the internet. They want to control how everyone interacts.
- Semaphor 3y ago
  Beehaw did not do that. They defederated 2 large ones because of open sign ups, and Lemmy not having other modding/admin tools available yet
  - Gareth321 3y ago
    That was the claim, but it’s clearly a lie. First, they’ve defederated with and blocked hundreds of instances, not two. It looks like close to 1,000. You can review yourself here: https://beehaw.org/instances https://beehaw.org/instances Second, it appears they have even more moderators than the instances with which they defederated. More than enough to keep illegal content off the instance. But that’s not the intended goal. They want content off the instance which is ideologically opposed to the owner. They make that clear in the instance description. They want more moderation than Reddit, which is already filled with insular ideological spaces. The users are all very much on board with this ideological purity. They freely admit it, so I’m not sure why you would contend it.
    - Semaphor 3y ago
      > It looks like close to 1,000 It’s 400. Versus over 3000 linked instances. That does not sound like an insanely long list, considering how many spam instances there are and those with questionable content.