Moderators banning/censoring people arent oppressors violating your rights; they are customer service representatives curating the space for their intended costomers. All this to say, I see Karen.

[email protected]

They give em bob haircuts, setup em up in a SUV, and groan when they see them and their stack of expired cupons.

EleventhHour

Well, this is how they should operate…

But these volunteers also require that you understand they are human beings too.* and, like all humans, they sometimes make mistakes.

Please be patient, especially during busy times of the year.

[email protected]

It almost sounds like you're saying people don't think of customer service representatives are people. If that's the case, woosh.

[email protected]

They're volunteers providing a public service for free around here, not employees.

Probably.

[email protected]

If currency is influence, they're getting paid.

[email protected]

In my personal experience, the people I see posting to [email protected] deserved the actions the mods took, and are looking to whine to someone.

southsamurai

I agree with you.

But can we let the Karen thing go now? It's been long enough

[email protected]

I just try and make a percentage of my post anti corporate.

[email protected]

Sorry to all the lovely Karen's I've meg during my life, no.

[email protected]

Communities are not owned by moderators. They are built by those that participate. The primary fallacy I see is the idea that anyone can start a different community and that size and momentum are meaningless. That is simply not the case.

An authoritarian or very active mod, in any community with public participation is actively abusing those users when they act in opposition to the interests of the community. A visible mod is a bad mod. The job of mod is as a janitor acting in the interests of the community. If you care about authority or steering, you shouldn't be a mod or admin.

Nothing about being a mod is hard. You don't need to read every post or comment. All you do is setup the basic guidelines and trust the community to vote and flag bad stuff. The community will always flag the bad stuff. The only part that really matters is that you set yourself aside and really look into any flagged issue while giving the benefit of the doubt in absolutely every possible way one can imagine while never allowing bigotry type abuse. This is how to be a good mod, to be an invisible mod. The job is only to herd bad bots and sort the flags from others.

[email protected]

Moderation plays a big part in shaping the community. Are community guidlines not set by the mods? If there are people participating not following the guidlines, when they get squelching because they weren't following the rules agree to by everyone participating in the community.

[email protected]

Nothing about being a mod is hard.

Would you like to play a game?

Trust & Safety Tycoon

Manage your team, set policies, make investments, and tackle the challenging world of Trust & Safety

(trustandsafety.fun)

[email protected]

It's a very mixed bag, dependently largely on the personal views of the moderators at-large relative to the speakers. For the most part, the mods at .world seem egalitarian and amicable to liberalish dissenting views. We haven't seen a slew of censorship/bannings over arguments about veganism or Israel/Palestine or capitalism vs socialism.

But the "y'all deserve to get banned" mentality is largely tied up in the idea that their ideas are bad for being outside the spectrum of your allowable discourse. Meanwhile, a community like .ml or Truth Social doing a censorship/ban on content is morally repugnant because its limiting conversations that are inside the spectrum of your allowable discourse.

The technical mechanics of these communities are the same, everyone's just arguing where the lines should be drawn.

[email protected]

Guidelines are not rigid. The Hippocrates aphorism "first, do no harm" is key in principal and practice. A visible mod is always a bad mod.

[email protected]

No, not really. What is this?

[email protected]

Okay, sure, but Greenwald's an absolute fascist-apologist piece of shit who only hides behind a liberal-libertarian veneer when it is convenient.

Past that, the problem you run into with dissent is that it is heavily predicated on whether you are willing to endorse the dissenters. The more alien a community's political views and activities, the less tolerant admins become. The cause of Luigi Mangione is the most notable one, as certain communities seem to reveal in cannonizing his image while others furiously scrub out anything but the most derogatory mention of his name.

How do you distinguish between the dissident Freedom Fighter and the dissident Terrorist? What do you perceive as the limit of tolerance towards the intolerant? What kind of advocacy is constructive and what is merely provocative or trollish?

When you've got a guy like Glenn paling around with Tucker Carlson and bemoaning the Woke Antifa Left one minute, then crying over their own community of MAGA Truthers getting deep sixed by the Deep State, it seems the very idea of legitimate "dissent" is predicated on whether you align with it or not.

[email protected]

And if your aunt was a man, she'd be your uncle.

If I create a community and it gets 1k members I'm not a businessman.

[email protected]

I think for the most part they're trying to protect themselves, their communities and their servers.

That said, I left world for other places and found some of the stuff that was defederated to be interesting and provide a little balance.

There's certainly nothing going on here even close to the crap that was going on at Reddit.

[email protected]

Man, I'm only at the "Company Ethos" question (at the very beginning) and I already don't like the choices it's giving me.

AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet

You're not the sharpest tack in the box. Are you?