3 ms·

I would say in this moment highly moderated spaces (bluesky, mastadon) are more 'chic' than anything-goes spaces (4chan, twitter) there are plenty of techies w

I would say in this moment highly moderated spaces (bluesky, mastadon) are more 'chic' than anything-goes spaces (4chan, twitter) there are plenty of techies who believed in freedom from being surveilled by government censors without any social pressure to be cool or rebellious or whatever. It's just a principal someone can hold, doesn't have to have anything to do with peer pressure

rsynnott 2y ago
Bluesky moderation is largely consensual (as is Mastodon moderation in theory, though unless you run your own instance you deputise it to whoever runs your instance in practice); to a large extent, if you don't use blocklists or moderation services, it's almost unmoderated, except for illegal content. I'd argue less 'moderated' than Twitter, really, in that it doesn't by default do things like downrank links.
- jazzyjackson 2y ago
  I know libsoftikok and TERFs are lightning rods, but it is untrue that bluesky leaves moderation to the individual. Accounts posting squarely legal content are removed by the site administrators because the community demands that they not have to deal with 'nazis and bigots' I like the architecture of bluesky a lot but it doesn't fulfill its promise until third-parties go through the trouble of hosting relays and appviews so that people whose opinion the first party admins finds objectionable could still communicate.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    > Accounts posting squarely legal content are removed by the site administrators because the community demands that they not have to deal with 'nazis and bigots' I'm not sure that that is true. I subscribe to a blocklist of transphobes, which has literally thousands of people on it. I suspect that libsoftiktok et al were getting performatively banned by putting bigoted content in their _profiles_, which _are_ somewhat heavily moderated. (Though, actually, that libsoftiktok arsehole does sometimes sic her followers on named people, which is verboten, so maybe it was that.)
    - jazzyjackson 2y ago
      Hm, fair, thanks for the counterpoint. I do think the people who got kicked got kicked because they were coming with the intent to troll and harass, but the fact that the site admins intervene in these cases is evidence that they don't have confidence in the community moderation tools so far, and theyre still curating access, which is fine, it's just not very distributed of them.
llamaimperative 2y ago
> It's just a principal someone can hold, doesn't have to have anything to do with peer pressure Other cultures: All about signaling Mine: All about real principles
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

rsynnott 2y ago

Bluesky moderation is largely consensual (as is Mastodon moderation in theory, though unless you run your own instance you deputise it to whoever runs your instance in practice); to a large extent, if you don't use blocklists or moderation services, it's almost unmoderated, except for illegal content. I'd argue less 'moderated' than Twitter, really, in that it doesn't by default do things like downrank links.

jazzyjackson 2y ago
I know libsoftikok and TERFs are lightning rods, but it is untrue that bluesky leaves moderation to the individual. Accounts posting squarely legal content are removed by the site administrators because the community demands that they not have to deal with 'nazis and bigots' I like the architecture of bluesky a lot but it doesn't fulfill its promise until third-parties go through the trouble of hosting relays and appviews so that people whose opinion the first party admins finds objectionable could still communicate.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  > Accounts posting squarely legal content are removed by the site administrators because the community demands that they not have to deal with 'nazis and bigots' I'm not sure that that is true. I subscribe to a blocklist of transphobes, which has literally thousands of people on it. I suspect that libsoftiktok et al were getting performatively banned by putting bigoted content in their _profiles_, which _are_ somewhat heavily moderated. (Though, actually, that libsoftiktok arsehole does sometimes sic her followers on named people, which is verboten, so maybe it was that.)
  - jazzyjackson 2y ago
    Hm, fair, thanks for the counterpoint. I do think the people who got kicked got kicked because they were coming with the intent to troll and harass, but the fact that the site admins intervene in these cases is evidence that they don't have confidence in the community moderation tools so far, and theyre still curating access, which is fine, it's just not very distributed of them.

llamaimperative 2y ago

> It's just a principal someone can hold, doesn't have to have anything to do with peer pressure Other cultures: All about signaling Mine: All about real principles

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]