@ernest how do I report a Magazin on kbin.social ? There is a usere called “ps” who is posting to his own “antiwoke” Magazin on kbin.social. Please remove this and dont give them a chance to etablish them self on kbin.social. When I report his stuff it will go to him because he is the moderator of the magazin? Seems like a problem. Screenshot of the “antiwoke” Magazin /sub on kbin.social. 4 Headlines are visible, 2 exampels: “Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society” “How to end wokeness” #Moderation #kbin #kbin.social 📎
edit: dont feed the troll, im shure ernest will delet them all when he sees this. report and move on.
- ernest ( @ernest@kbin.social ) 295•1 year ago
I just need a little more time. There will likely be a technical break announced tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Along with the migration to new servers, we will be introducing new moderation tools that I am currently working on and testing (I had it planned for a bit later in my roadmap). Then, I will address your reports and handle them very seriously. I try my best to delete sensitive content, but with the current workload and ongoing relocation, it takes a lot of time. I am being extra cautious now. The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly. For now, please make use of the option to block the magazine/author.
- LoafyLemon ( @LoafyLemon@kbin.social ) 46•1 year ago
A friendly reminder; Please don’t forget to take your time and step away from Kbin whenever you need a break. Your mental health is just as important, if not most important, for the project to succeed.
- albinanigans ( @albinanigans@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
You are correct.
I’m bookmarking this page to return to later. Time to pull up some weeds!
thank you!
I appreciate all you do and your quick respond.
Multipile Things I noticed as a creater of this thread:
can I close comments ?
can I hide comments ?
can I pin a response?
can I quickly see from what server peope are interacting?I am no coder but would love to support you with all the work that is done.
At least some of the costs can be taken of your shoulders:
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/kbin
Edit: Can you close this thread for me ?
- ernest ( @ernest@kbin.social ) 83•1 year ago
All the things you mentioned are in the roadmap. However, we can either do it quickly and potentially encounter issues in a few weeks or months, or take a bit more time for a more thorough approach. I’ve decided to move away from playful prototyping. From now on, every change will be tested before it’s approved for kbin.social - it’s no longer just my code (https://lab2.kbin.pub/). I’d like to close this thread for you… but can we just agree not to respond in it anymore? ;p
- Hobovision ( @Hobovision@kbin.social ) 24•1 year ago
I don’t think closing threads is a great idea or in keeping with how this all works. I think it’d be nice to be able to mute a thread as an individual, but by its nature these discussions are open and shared with many instances. If we close it on kbin.social, other kbin instances, lemmy instances, and even places like mastodon and pixelfed could keep discussing, if I understand activity pub correctly.
- ernest ( @ernest@kbin.social ) 42•1 year ago
In such important tasks, I would like to engage in community-driven development. When I start planning these tasks, I will come to you with my whiteboard and sketch out the individual stages. Together, we will look for the advantages and disadvantages of such a solution, the weak and strong points. This is to jointly make a decision on whether the change makes sense on kbin.social but also in the perspective of the entire federation. It can be a great fun ;)
- Snapz ( @Snapz@beehaw.org ) 6•1 year ago
Let’s all agree that of its many issues, locking/deleting open threats to targeted minority groups and pro supremacist propaganda meant to hurt or influence vulnerable people was NOT a drawback of the Reddit experience.
Yes, it’s a difficult thing to enforce a subjective line of a basic standard of decency, but it’s also what a society is and one of the main reasons we gather as people. The quality of a group is shown in how they accommodate the weakest and most vulnerable among them.
If we aren’t prioritizing a way to send this CHUD and people liked them to the hypothetical edge of town, to be sure they can’t bombard the young person struggling with their gender identity with targeted hate at their weakest moment, then what are we doing here?
- bane_killgrind ( @bane_killgrind@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
Thank you for being thorough
- slicedcheesegremlin ( @slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social ) 27•1 year ago
Everyone appreciates your effort here, ernest. Spez hasn’t gotten 92 upvotes on a comment in years lmao despite Reddit having millions of users, it really shows how the difference.
- KTVX94 ( @KTVX94@kbin.social ) 26•1 year ago
I joined kbin recently and I’m kind of concerned about the implications of this. I don’t support those posts at all, but who gets to say what’s worth banning and what not? Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site? Or is it the specific instance that magazine is on that has the authority to ban what’s inside? How does all of this work?
Edit: my bad, I got kbin and kbin.social mixed up. Noob mistake.
- Kierunkowy74 ( @Kierunkowy74@kbin.social ) 40•1 year ago
kbin.social administration controls only what is published on kbin.social, and what content from elsewhere kbin.social users can see. An user banned from kbin.social can make another account, on another site and start recreate there his banned community. kbin.social will be able to ban this remote user and remote community, but this restricts only what kbin.social users can see.
Exactly the same for another /kbin or lemmy site - just replace the domain name accordingly.
- harmonea ( @harmonea@kbin.social ) 27•1 year ago
Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site?
No, it’s exactly the opposite. The entire point of a decentralized federation is that while yes, the admin is in complete control of what content is allowed on his or her own instance, users who don’t like what the admin is doing can just spin up their own new instances.
Ernest can ban this type of content if he likes. Others can take the kbin software and make a new instance where it’s welcome. Ernest can choose not to federate with that instance if they continue to push content that’s against his rules, but Ernest doesn’t have the power to dictate the direction for hundreds of millions of users’ experience like a certain centralized site’s mad CEO or admin board does.
What would be against the nature of ActivityPub is if Ernest built something into the software to prevent it being used for types of content he doesn’t like, even on other instances.
- lazy ( @lazy@kbin.social ) 22•1 year ago
While I kind of agree with you in being concerned about who gets to control what we see and don’t see and the censorship aspect, there is also “the paradox of tolerance” to be considered and maybe in that light it is correct to not tolerate that subs intolerance.
Regarding the Paradox of Tolerance:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance- MrMonkey ( @MrMonkey@lemm.ee ) 2•1 year ago
The Paradox of Tolerance is hot garbage:
- updawg ( @updawg@kbin.social ) 21•1 year ago
It actually is one of the strengths of the decentralized nature of the Fediverse. But there are still growing pains associated with it.
- livus ( @livus@kbin.social ) 7•1 year ago
Remember, kbin.social is just one instance of kbin. Ernest banning something on kbin.social does not mean banning it from the fediverse.
It could pop up on another fediverse site or even another kbin site.
- Poke ( @poke@beehaw.org ) 1•1 year ago
“who gets to say what’s worth banning and what not?”
Just like with privately hosted services like Twitter and Reddit, it’s the person/group hosting the content. The decentralized nature means that if you disagree, you can voice that, or host your own instance, or move elsewhere that aligns with your viewpoints. Some people have multiple accounts spread out across instances to see different kinds of content.
Rambling below, you can stop reading here if you want.
Being federated doesn’t mean moderation can be ignored on either end. Some groups may not want to deal with certain content that others want to (could be for personal or legal reasons), and that’s OK. Since individual posts can’t be moderated across instances, if there are big patterns of moderation disagreements, then defederation is the only option and that’s usually not fun for anyone, so it’s generally in everyone’s best interest to stay generally acceptable to everyone else.
Of course, nothing is forcing that. There are currently instances defederated from my home instance Beehaw, for example. I’d imagine they’re still doing just fine without that federation, too. It can be argued that it’s against the spirit of federation, but at the same time you really can’t expect people to want to host data on their server that may not be morally or legally acceptable to them.
(This is all ignoring purpose-driven instances. People can choose to make an instance where only a specific kind of content is available, too. It’s much easier to manage that kind of instance due to the smaller scale, but as with anything there are downsides to that, too.)
- Infiltrated_ad8271 ( @Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social ) 15•1 year ago
Could you clarify what you would do in cases like this? Censor based on misinterpretation of the clickbait headline, even if it does not contain hate content at all?
- TheDudeAbiding ( @TheDudeAbiding@kbin.social ) 17•1 year ago
That’s the best bait you could come up with? Come on, you can do better.
- spicy_biscuits ( @spicy_biscuits@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
Thank you Ernest, we appreciate you ☺️
- cacheson ( @cacheson@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly.
I have been wondering how instance-wide moderation will end up looking on kbin, once you’ve had a chance to get a team in place for that. While it is (I assume) a “generalist” instance, it’s important to keep in mind that you can’t please everyone. Trying to have too broad of an audience will just result in retaining those with a high tolerance for toxicity (usually highly toxic themselves), while everyone else leaves in favor of better-managed spaces.
Communities in general, and particularly on the internet, need to understand what their purpose is, and be proactive about filtering out those that are incompatible with that purpose. This doesn’t mean judging those people as wrong, or “bad people”, it just means recognizing that not everyone is going to get along, and that some level of group cohesion needs to be maintained.
- atypicaloddity ( @atypicaloddity@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Agreed, that’s part of my problem with generalist instances. They’re so broad that they serve multiple communities with differing expectations, and it forces admins to take sides.
- cacheson ( @cacheson@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
I think there is value in having both generalist and specialized instances, and the big landing spots for new users should probably strive to be more generalist. As you point out though, there are limits to how broad of an audience one can practically cater to.
- HidingCat ( @HidingCat@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Wow, more new servers! Looks like the growth has been really explosive. It wasn’t that long ago you migrated Kbin to Fastly right?
- magnetosphere ( @magnetosphere@kbin.social ) 147•1 year ago
Those “antiwoke” people disgust me. I encourage disagreements. I don’t encourage thinly veiled hate disguised with code words. Tolerance isn’t “far left”.
- fedosyndicate ( @fedosyndicate@kbin.social ) 22•1 year ago
I agree, I think it’s good to have a discussion, and polite disagreement is quite acceptable. But like you said, encouraging violence and hatred is not acceptable to me.
- Aloomineum ( @Aloomineum@kbin.social ) 75•1 year ago
If there’s more people here like 10A it would be great if you could speak up so I could keep building my block list
- Voyajer ( @Voyajer@kbin.social ) 27•1 year ago
It’s kind of impressive that that already have -2000 rep
- stillnotahero ( @stillnotahero@kbin.social ) 24•1 year ago
I just took a peek at that user’s profile. Saw what magazines they moderate. Not surprised we have a different point of view.
- BlackCoffee ( @BlackCoffee@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
The more people who will get on the platform the easier it will be to shut the intolerant and bullshitters out.
- ArugulaZ ( @ArugulaZ@kbin.social ) 19•1 year ago
I’ve got a pretty good idea of what the “A” in “10A” stands for.
- genoxidedev1 ( @genoxidedev1@kbin.social ) 22•1 year ago
10 assholes?
- Xeelee ( @Xeelee@kbin.social ) 10•1 year ago
10xAdolf
- albinanigans ( @albinanigans@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
Sheesh, I know who that is already! I had them blocked ages ago. What a tool.
- static ( @static@kbin.social ) 49•1 year ago
A single shitposter, with only downvoted posts. without attention they would have stopped posting, but now it has attention.
While the content is stupid and vile, is he breaking any rules?
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 53•1 year ago
Streisand effect for sure. There seems to be run of these types of posts in the fediverse lately. People don’t seem to realize that sometimes they’re better off letting these situations take their natural course (and die), and not intervene unless it grows beyond manageability.
- zedtronic ( @zedtronic@kbin.social ) 43•1 year ago
#1 rule on the internet: don’t feed the trolls. Downvote them, block them, move on. They’re not here to engage in good faith.
- rastilin ( @rastilin@kbin.social ) 41•1 year ago
The problem is that by that point it will have grown beyond manageability. You know the “Nazi bar” saying.
There’s a bunch of people (who are Nazis) and they seem cool, quiet, well spoken, just having a drink. And they bring their friends and those guys are cool too. Then those guys bring their friends and those guys are less cool and now normal people don’t drink at the bar anymore and you look around and it’s a Nazi bar and you can’t make them leave or they’ll start causing “problems”. So. I’m all for just using the brutal hammer of censorship.
It’s not a free speech platform and no one ever said it was.
- genoxidedev1 ( @genoxidedev1@kbin.social ) 38•1 year ago
Hate speech is not part of free speech anyways. Fuck nazis. Everyone that gets offended by that can get fucked as well.
- rastilin ( @rastilin@kbin.social ) 24•1 year ago
Something else that occurred to me. If someone posted something that was pro-woke in /r/conservative or on Parler or any of those other apps, they’d get banned immediately. “Free Speech” only seems to be a concern when it’s right-wingers posting on left-leaning forums, never the reverse.
I think that taking the free speech argument at face value in the present day just means you’re gullible.
- magnetosphere ( @magnetosphere@kbin.social ) 16•1 year ago
I think hardcore conservatives simply don’t have an inherent sense of empathy. That’s why they don’t really care about the victims of a crime, disaster, etc. until it happens to them personally. They do not have the perspective to put themselves in another person’s shoes.
It’s NOT an intelligence issue. It’s easy to write people off as stupid, but that’s not the case. For them, being unable to think with empathy is as natural as being unable to see infrared light.
They’ve figured out that making themselves appear to be victims can sometimes make people listen, but they can’t fully explain why. That lack of understanding is why they don’t see the hypocrisy in banning people from their platforms, but then whining loudly when they’re treated the same way.
This is all just guesswork, but it’s the best explanation I’ve been able to come up with that doesn’t make my head explode.
- genoxidedev1 ( @genoxidedev1@kbin.social ) 9•1 year ago
Cross out the “hardcore”, lack of empathy is very much a core part of conservatism no matter which side of conservatism, social | fiscal, you lean into and by how much. If you’re socially conservative you want every social aspect to stay as it is which proves inherently a lack of empathy. If you’re fiscally conservative you want monetary value to stay as is (in terms of inflation and cost-cutting etc.) no matter whom it hurts (as long as it doesn’t hurt you, of course).
Which is why I personally think it actually is (also) an intelligence issue, because the people that are not socially conservative and only fiscally conservative usually vote for the party of big government and military spending ® which goes against anything fiscally conservative and as a “cool” side effect also proves to be detrimental to social values of different people and groups.
You probably know the quote by George Carlin, as its a told tale as old as day. I think the quote nicely illustrates the voting game in the US.
- h34d ( @h34d@feddit.de ) 2•1 year ago
Reminds me of a quote by Nazi minister of propaganda Joseph Goebbels from 1935, after the Nazis took power:
“Wenn unsere Gegner sagen: Ja, wir haben Euch doch früher die […] Freiheit der Meinung zugebilligt – –, ja, Ihr uns, das ist doch kein Beweis, daß wir das Euch auch tuen sollen! […] Daß Ihr das uns gegeben habt, – das ist ja ein Beweis dafür, wie dumm Ihr seid!”
– source
Rough translation:
“When our enemies say: But we’ve granted you […] freedom of opinion back in the day – –, well, yes, you granted it to us, but that is no proof that we should do likewise! […] The fact that you granted it to us, – that is only proof for how stupid you are!”
For fascists at least talking about freedom of speech and the like is just another tool they try to wield in their quest to gain power, nothing else.
- AshDene ( @AshDene@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
With the very rare exception, absolutely.
- AshDene ( @AshDene@kbin.social ) 11•1 year ago
It depends on your definition of free speech, the US constitution does consider it part of free speech.
The US constitution also considers free speech a right that protect a websites right not to repeat hate speech, not a users “right” to force a website to host their speech. In the constitutions view of the world free speech is protection against the government, not a tool to force other people to host your speech.
- genoxidedev1 ( @genoxidedev1@kbin.social ) 26•1 year ago
I really do not care about your constitution. I’m from Germany not the US.
‘“Germany places strict limits on speech and expression when it comes to right-wing extremism” or anything reminiscent of Nazism. Hate speech on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity also is banned in Germany.’
And I think this is the way all countries should handle it. No need to defend people promoting hate speech by debating me or your definition of free speach, I do not adhere by it.
Edit: I will wear 10A(ssholes’) downvote as a badge of honor, thank you!
- AshDene ( @AshDene@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
I’m actually not from the US, I was just giving it as an example because it is the most famous one that unequivocally does include it.
What I’m really saying is “free speech” isn’t really one thing. It means different things in different contexts. For instance the breadth of “free speech” you should allow in what you promise to repeat (that’s what hosting something is) is much smaller than the breadth of “free speech” that you should not think less of someone for saying is in turn much smaller than the breadth of “free speech” that you should not wield the power of government to punish. And people legitimately disagree on where each of those boundaries lie.
I do think I missed the mark with the comment you replied to rereading it. I raised it because when someone says “It’s not a free speech platform and no one ever said it was” they are using the american republican-troll’s definition of free speech that means “anything but child porn”, and I think your reply was misunderstanding their comment as a result. But I don’t think I successfully conveyed my point.
- Aesthesiaphilia ( @Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
Everything else aside, how you gonna say you don’t care about the US Constitution and then bring up the German Constitution? No one cares about that one either.
- backseat ( @backseat@kbin.social ) 16•1 year ago
What is the relevance of the US constitution? This is not a US platform.
- updawg ( @updawg@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
It depends on your definition of free speech
It’s one definition that is different than the definition that had been provided in the parent comment.
- albinanigans ( @albinanigans@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
Appending:
Free speech also doesn’t mean “freedom from consequences.” And sometimes those include getting your shit deleted from a website or dragged up and down social media.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
True, agreed. I’m only commenting on the idea that these people or groups shouldn’t get free advertising when people find them. These posts that are blasting their way to the top of “hot” just like a trending news article are counter-productive. In the internet it’s better take actions for these things that are as invisible as possible.
- smokinjoe ( @smokinjoe@kbin.social ) 34•1 year ago
and not intervene unless it grows beyond manageability.
I’d rather nip it in the bud. You’re just letting things fester.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
I don’t disagree with the sentiment, but it will become impossible to accomplish, practically speaking, as the fediverse grows. There’s only so much that can be done with volunteers, and it’s not like armies of paid staffers work much better (as we’ve seen the major tech corps try to do).
There is a sociological aspect to this, numerous studies have confirmed the effects of highlighting bad actors. There’s a copycat effect (as studies on mass shootings show) as well as what we call the Streisand effect. Both inadvertently encourage others to perpetuate the behaviour rather than serving to limit it.
- icydefiance ( @icydefiance@kbin.social ) 14•1 year ago
Allowing bad actors to advertise themselves is highlighting them. Banning them and deleting their communities is the opposite of highlighting them.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Exactly. We agree? Thats what I said/mean. This post doesn’t ban them, it’s inadvertently advertising their content. There have been several post like this recently. While they may mean well they likely have the opposite effect.
- smokinjoe ( @smokinjoe@kbin.social ) 9•1 year ago
So your solution is to just give up and let hate fester? When has appeasement ever worked?
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
Not at all. I think you’re conflating what I said with someone else. I’m only suggested we don’t inadvertently promote this content by creating a front-page post denouncing it.
The point about it being impossible to accomplish is about perfection. It’s a wack-a-mole game. Since this content and people will always be there until found, it’s better to not give them more of an audience.
No site will ever perfectly remove objectionable content. It’s one reason why the upvote downvote system is so valuable for a site like this.
- smokinjoe ( @smokinjoe@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
You can’t avoid hate and hope it recedes. You have to take it directly head on and stomp it out immediately.
If they decide to move elsewhere, then follow them there and continue rooting them out.
Just “letting people decide” is useless and will only enable them to continue.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
Agreed, I think you’re still conflating things I never said. Nothing was in the “let the people decide” vein.
Thats why I think it’s better to silently remove them rather then making posts saying “look at this bad guy right there”.
- wahming ( @wahming@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
I think the problem is that at the moment, the system is new enough that there’s no way to get this sort of content removed. Hence this front page post. It’s not about calling attention to the magazine, it’s about calling attention to the entire issue…
- AnonTwo ( @AnonTwo@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
Where does this sentiment come from? Reddit for the most part already does this. Twitter before Elon showed up did this. Most modern sites already do this
The only place I can think of where this is commonplace is 4chan, because they don’t moderate.
Yes, highlighting bad actors over a course of time can be problematic. But the point in this case is the point out that we don’t have the tools to deal with said bad actor. The tools that other sites have. It’s not being said in vain, the goal is to make aware that something needs to be done so that people don’t even see the bad actor to bring attention to them.
There is a purpose to the current efforts. I think everyone understands that constantly bringing attention to them will do no good, but the goal here is to bring attention to tools that are needed, so that it doesn’t happen again, or at the very least to this extent.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
You’d might be conflating my comment with someone else? I’m not against moderating. I just think it’s a bad idea to blast these communities or users onto the front page when they’re found.
No example has been able to squash out bad actors and unwanted content completely. That’s the impossible task I’m referring to. Neither volunteers, nor paid staff have accomplished this for any site. In all your example there are still areas flying under the radar.
As such, it’s better to not inadvertently fan the flames when you find the fire, don’t make their soapbox bigger. Instead put it out quietly so it doesn’t harm anyone else.
- AnonTwo ( @AnonTwo@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
Examples are good when trying to point out a problem actually exists and not have certain people trying to tone it down and make it not seem like as big a problem as it is, despite even the devs acknowledging there’s a problem.
The final point is more tools are being worked on, the thread did do something, so trying to argue a point that would basically have prevented it just seems…poor taste.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
Everything you’re talking is perception, friend. You chose to take my comment that way. The dev tools were being worked on long before this post.
As I said before, I’m not making this up, the phenomenon is studied and the effect is proven.
The biggest thing im afraid of happening to Kbin/the lemmyverse is that it will end up like Ruqqus, especially now that it seems to be swamped with trolls.
- grahamsz ( @grahamsz@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
I expect that instances will get more locked down, perhaps those of us on an instance can vouch for new users who might join, but I can’t see how a volunteer admin could police a million user instance. I used to run a 10k user discussion site and while that wasn’t a fulltime job it was still a giant pain in the ass at times. If we can get in a steady state where an instance has a core of active posters and lurkers then that seems better than infinite growth.
That then surely leads to federated instances that each represent the tolerances of their admin(s) and they presumably federate or not with other instances with similar sensibilities.
In the end the nazis will get their nazi instance and federate with likeminded types - they get defederated everywhere else and wont really be a problem (maybe for the FBI). (Though I’m not certain that all internet nazis truly are, i think there a group of trolls that get their kicks from being controversial and will get no joy by being surrounded by people who accept them)
The problems are going to be in the gray areas. For example, the argument that trans people don’t deserve to exist… I find that abhorrent, but there are people who will happily say that on TV, and there are CEOs of $44B social networks that appear to agree. Some instances will tolerate that on the grounds of free speech and others will not, then the admins are left trying to decide what’s grounds for defederation.
However in my limited experience, the thing that kills projects like this is too much navel gazing. There will always be some trolling and noise, but if the remaining users expend all their energy talking about it then the whole thing collapses in on itself. I feel like this is starting to happen on reddit where lots of subs are consumed by meta, but the best thing we can do here is get out and create active communities.
- AnonTwo ( @AnonTwo@kbin.social ) 20•1 year ago
So here’s my issue here.
This guy is clearly not a small issue. He’s being as loud and obnoxious as possible.
If there’s nothing in place to deal with one huge troublemaker, what’s to stop a dozen who come to Kbin and start making hateful communities?
My concern at this point is that Kbin itself gets defederated because the other instances don’t think it’s taking moderation seriously.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
In what way is it a huge deal? In what way was it loud? (Until now)
This person had a handful of heavily downvoted posts and interactions so they never made it to the “hot” or “active” pages.
(Are we talking about the same person?)
If you take a poll of everyone in this thread I would bet almost everyone hadn’t seen these posts or heard of the username.
But now they have, with the help of this post.
- AshDene ( @AshDene@kbin.social ) 7•1 year ago
Speaking for myself I’ve seen both 10A and ps making these comments. 10A has managed to amass at least -2732 downvotes, ps -653, that’s not a trivial amount of interaction. I came across an antiwoke post on the front page (I think just right after it was posted, so bad luck). And I’m holding off advocating people move to kbin until I see a moderating policy that results in banning them.
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
It sounds like you were viewing the “new” tab?The hot/active tabs on Kbin wouldn’t receive that content so early. It will always be a wackamole game, no platform will ever succeed 100%. Once there are more advanced moderation tools, I would suggest silently removing objectionable content or users.
Also, I’ll have to disagree slightly, thats not a lot of interaction. This single post alone has over 300 upvotes since posted. The volume of either is simply an indication of how strongly people react.
- AshDene ( @AshDene@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
It sounds like you were viewing the “new” tab?
I don’t think so, but I couldn’t swear to it.
thats not a lot of interaction
Probably we just have different thresholds for a lot. People seeing hate 3000 times on the platform seems like a lot to me.
- Aesthesiaphilia ( @Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social ) 5•1 year ago
You missed the whole point.
He said,
what’s to stop a dozen who come to Kbin and start making hateful communities?
- SpacemanSpiff ( @SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
That’s exactly my point. Even when there are better moderating tools and the site admins have time to delete magazines, they will still pop-up faster then you can stop them. No site on the internet has ever fully solved this issue.
Since that is the reality, by avoiding inadvertently promoting them before they’re removed, a site is much more efficient at managing the workload.
Posts like this can have the unintended consequence of spawning more trolls or objectionable actors, this can and does actually make the site management harder.
- Aesthesiaphilia ( @Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
I think with better moderation tools, it’s absolutely possible to silence hate speech. The modern sanitized internet has managed to do it with child porn, which was EVERYWHERE in the wild west days. It’s possible with motivation.
Hate speech is profitable, so companies generally have a profit incentive to keep it around. The fediverse doesn’t.
- TipRing ( @TipRing@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
Respectfully, I disagree. If you are running a bar and a nazi comes in with all their nazi periphranalia and orders a drink and behaves. You still kick them out. Because if you don’t the next time they will bring all their nazi friends and it will be much harder to kick them out and then your other patrons stop showing up because of all the nazis around and now you are running a nazi bar.
Ban hate trolls. Ban them immediately. Because if that content festers on the site it will be much harder to ban later.
- wahming ( @wahming@kbin.social ) 45•1 year ago
Respectful Behavior
We expect all users to treat each other with respect and kindness. Harassment, hate speech, or any other form of harmful behavior will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to remove any content or user that violates these guidelines.
Isn’t this standard for anywhere that doesn’t want to end up as T_D or 4chan?
- static ( @static@kbin.social ) 16•1 year ago
The posts itself are not rulebreaking, but i could be wrong.
But the reply here is breaking the rules
https://kbin.social/m/antiwoke/t/101045/Time-to-reject-the-extreme-trans-lobby-harming-our-societyThat’s mostly the problem with those posts, while not rule breaking, they are hate magnets.
If the moderator refuses to properly moderate the comments this would be a proper reason for a ban.
- AnonTwo ( @AnonTwo@kbin.social ) 29•1 year ago
Incidentally the person breaking the rules is making the biggest stir in this thread about not banning people.
Guy literally is advocating beating people to death as a good Christian moral while also trying to advocate he shouldn’t be banned for it.
- czech ( @czech@faux.moe ) 4•1 year ago
They will always advocate for blocking over banning because they can easily make new accounts to spread their hateful message. To block a user you must first read their message; their mission is accomplished.
Should the community have to continually deal with this baggage so that hateful people can intentionally misinterpret what “free speech” means?
- wahming ( @wahming@kbin.social ) 22•1 year ago
they are hate magnets.
And they were posted with the intent to be so. That suffices in my opinion. It’s not the lone post itself, but the context of the magazine as a whole.
If the moderator refuses to properly moderate the comments
Yes, the mod of antiwoke is about to exercise proper judgement
- smokinjoe ( @smokinjoe@kbin.social ) 7•1 year ago
What a fuckin psychopath.
- AnonTwo ( @AnonTwo@kbin.social ) 43•1 year ago
I mean, one of those examples is
“Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society”
That is a global rule violation on most sites. Hate speech.
- PenguinJuice ( @PenguinJuice@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
Genuinely curious what is hateful about that? Rejecting something does not equal hate or I guess I need to file a claim against universities and friends who rejected me.
- Ragnell ( @Ragnell@kbin.social ) 35•1 year ago
“extreme trans lobby” is a conspiratorial misrepresentation of a group of people who would just like to live their lives.
- PenguinJuice ( @PenguinJuice@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Source?
- ButterBiscuits ( @ButterBiscuits@beehaw.org ) 1•1 year ago
If you post a YouTube link as a source, you can safely be ignored…
- AnonTwo ( @AnonTwo@kbin.social ) 16•1 year ago
Let me take one excerpt from that thread and I want you to ask that again
Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable.
And to summarize: He’s basically advocating “good Christian morals” as being transphobic.
But also to the original post: It is wording the advocates for trans people as being extremists who are harming our society.
- HopeOfTheGunblade ( @HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social ) 0•1 year ago
Did they claim that you were harming society?
- albinanigans ( @albinanigans@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
Nah, we’re nipping this shit in the bud because the shitposting is only the Trojan horse.
This shit’s already here. Now we gotta shine a light on it and deal with it.
- Balssh ( @Balssh@kbin.social ) 5•1 year ago
I disagree: better to kill the evil in its infancy, rather than let it spread and hope it goes away by its own.
- sadreality ( @sadreality@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
clowns always trying to censor somebody… hunting for some low level degenerate to turn him into “antihero”
these people can’t seem to just enjoy a place with out starting a witch hunt
- Tigbitties ( @Tigbitties@kbin.social ) 41•1 year ago
Yeah, I really hope that shit gets nipped in the bud.
- VerifiablyMrWonka ( @VerifiablyMrWonka@kbin.social ) 41•1 year ago
Ha, I blocked the worst offender in the comments here, refreshed the page and now there are like… 6.
- rastilin ( @rastilin@kbin.social ) 30•1 year ago
Block them too. They’re not going to engage in good faith anyway.
- VerifiablyMrWonka ( @VerifiablyMrWonka@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
Oh, no no. It was that I blocked one person and there were only 6 other comments left (all fine) :D
Blocking a person seems to remove any comment tree they’re a branch in (i.e. their posts and all responses to those posts)
- aegisgfx877 ( @aegisgfx877@kbin.social ) 5•1 year ago
Ive decided not to block him so I can follow him around annoying him and downvoting everything he says
- minnieo ( @minnieo@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
i disagree with him obviously, but this just makes us (the people opposing him) look bad, dont do that
- FIST_FILLET ( @FIST_FILLET@kbin.social ) 5•1 year ago
plus, engaging with assholes usually just prompts them to continue being assholes. it’s a lose-lose
- HamSwagwich ( @HamSwagwich@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Ive decided not to block him so I can follow him around annoying him and downvoting everything he says
Perfect example of why voting should be public!
Blocking him is the right answer, it’s the right thing to do and solves the problem of him presenting posts you don’t want to see.
- kestrel7 ( @kestrel7@kbin.social ) 35•1 year ago
Yeah I was worried this could become a problem, because I imagine a lot of chuds are turned off of lemmy because of the tankie devs. Which makes sense. But I don’t think they should be welcome here, either. I’m trying to get away from that authoritarian shit, not get closer to the even worse kind of authoritarian shit.
- ArugulaZ ( @ArugulaZ@kbin.social ) 34•1 year ago
The frothing hysteria over “wokeness” (ie treating your fellow humans with respect) is just a smokescreen by the oil industry, which hopes it will take some pressure off it for, you know, slowly killing us all with global warming. You do know this, don’t you?
I went through a young Republican phase, too. Then I realized that the party had nothing to offer ordinary people but contempt and cynical manipulation. Like telling people that they can be good Christians by doing the exact opposite of what Christ did. Like pitting Americans against each other for their differences. Like convincing people that the former president, a monster by any objective standard, is this country’s savior when it’s clear that he’s just shaking the nation for loose change.
It’s called “wokeness” because we finally opened our eyes, saw what was happening all around us, and decided to do something about it. You can either recognize the evil in this world, or become another oblivious victim of it.
- esc27 ( @esc27@kbin.social ) 7•1 year ago
Real progress and change takes work and money. Inflated social issues can be “solved” with policy. This whole mess is just policial theater that creates the illusion of governance at the expense of minorities.
- unsophisticated ( @unsophisticated@kbin.social ) 5•1 year ago
This is a literal conspiracy theory.
- bane_killgrind ( @bane_killgrind@kbin.social ) 4•1 year ago
It’s not really. There is millions visibly spent on lobbying efforts against climate change, and invisibly stockholders invested in energy are board members of media companies. For example Jack Cockwell has over a billion dollars in Brookfield hedge fund, and that fund has been increasing it’s holdings in energy for the last decade. There’s some BCE board member that has millions of dollars in Wajax stocks (industrial equipment manufacturer), about half his net worth.
If you talk about industries with influence on one another from the perspective of ownership, you’ll find it’s all very incestuous as the richest people will diversify.
Weirdly, the people involved in Fox News only seem to own stock in FOX, but cash contributions to those people aren’t shown in the market data I’m looking at. Maybe I’m not looking in the right places, but I’m not a finance person.
- ArugulaZ ( @ArugulaZ@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
Every downvote is a sweet, sweet tear trickling down from the chubby cheek of an incel sociopath who was pre-emptively blocked. Delicious! Your agony sustains me!
- bumbly ( @bumbly@readit.buzz ) 31•1 year ago
“free speech” absolutists can host their stuff on their own instance. No need to do it here.
- minnieo ( @minnieo@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
agreed. im left wing and i dont agree with totally shutting conservatives down, or we will just seem like a censoring platform. i want them away from the general public, away from me, and their little communities (which will no doubt feed into itself and become more and more hateful) need to be heavily monitored and properly moderated for violent as well as hate speech, because theyre literally the only ones who ever have that issue of devolving into a straight up cult-like hate group anywhere they go. they for sure need to make their own instance and fuck off, supervised like children of course
- GataZapata ( @GataZapata@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
That seems a little overzealous. Conservatives can hang and get ribbed on, just no acfual fascists
- minnieo ( @minnieo@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
as long as they are a normal, rational person who isn’t in a cult-like trance, i don’t care. but they consistently devolve into alt-right extremists, especially when allowed to gather. so, when and if they do gather, they do need to be monitored. 4chan is a perfect example of what happens when they go mostly unmonitored. if they want their ‘fReE spEeCh’ they should go there and enjoy the various "n word rekt’ and ‘tr*nny hate’ threads.
- LollerCorleone ( @LollerCorleone@kbin.social ) 25•1 year ago
Its nice to see all the bigots popping up in one place. Makes it easier to block them. And we really need to get some instance level mods.
- HubertManne ( @HubertManne@kbin.social ) 17•1 year ago
I mean I don’t know or even care to censur on that level but thanks for the heads up so I can block. Im thinking it would be nice to have a recommened block magazine
- szczur ( @szczur@kbin.social ) 57•1 year ago
It’s not censorship, it’s self-defence.
- FfaerieOxide ( @FfaerieOxide@kbin.social ) 13•1 year ago
When I report his stuff it will go to him because he is the moderator of the magazin[e]?
When someone reported one of my posts (they thought it was spam) in my magazine I got a notification in my magazine panel, yes. No alert telling me there was a notification, but a notification.
Am unsure if admin likewise get a ping but almost certain they would be too busy to notice if they did.
- PenguinJuice ( @PenguinJuice@kbin.social ) 12•1 year ago
People are allowed to have a difference of opinion. You don’t get to silence people just because you disagree with them. Please do not go down that dark path.
Believe it or not there are people who do not subscribe to certain views, bur that does not make them “hate mongerers” anymore than the extreme opposition. It’s only extremists and people who try to silence others for their views that are assholes. You live in a great big world full of a lot of differing opinions and that’s what makes it beautiful. Silencing opinions because of your personal beliefs is not acceptable.
- OKbinBuddyChicanery ( @OKbinBuddyChicanery@kbin.social ) 56•1 year ago
Transphobia, racism, etc aren’t an opinion. They are hate speech. Full stop.
I am absolutely against silencing opinions. I am also absolutely in favor of silencing hate speech. Understand the difference.
- hydro033 ( @hydro033@kbin.social ) 10•1 year ago
What about when it’s more nuanced like “I support trans people to do whatever they want, but I don’t support transwomen in women’s sports.” Or “I am cautious about transitioning young children until we have a better medical understanding of gender dysphoria.” Seems like many here would still consider my perspective to be “hate speech,” which I, of course, find ridiculous.
- effingjoe ( @effingjoe@kbin.social ) 23•1 year ago
When you’re discussing traits inherent to a person-- not things they do or believe, but things they are, it’s almost certainly hate speech. A quick test would be to swap the inherent thing you’re talking about with skin color, since that one seems obvious to most people. So, would you say that an opinion that you support people of color, you just don’t support them playing sports with people that aren’t POC, be nuanced opinion or hate speech?
As for your second hypothetical, that is a discussion for doctors and experts, and they’ve already had it, and that’s why children can’t get non-reversible procedures until they’re 18. No one is transitioning children; they are blocking their development so they can have a choice on how to proceed when they’re adults.
- AmidFuror ( @AmidFuror@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
Your logic means men (not trans women) should be able to compete in women’s sports.
- hydro033 ( @hydro033@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
False equivalence. XY humans destroy XX humans in sports, it’s why we have men’s and women’s divisions - women are a protected class. Allowing XY individuals in women’s sports is not fair to women, and undermines the entire purpose of sport and a women’s division. Look at it this way : men’s division is really an open division, but we created a women’s division for the purpose of fairness.
Second point, let’s just say you don’t know how much I know about this topic or these issues. The question of reversibility by using hormone blockers is still being debated. We simply do not have enough data to know if its safe. You cannot treat hormone manipulation as some simple process. There are many feedback loops involved in the HPG axes.
- fosho ( @fosho@lemmy.ca ) 1•1 year ago
regarding the sports issue, i can understand the argument that this situation could be abused for an unfair advantage. and eventually it most likely would be by someone. however i don’t have any good solutions that aren’t shitty. even an absolutely sincere trans person could still have an unfair advantage but i would never advocate discrimination by banning them from competing. either option is unfair to someone. it’s a tough issue and one that has no easy answers.
- hydro033 ( @hydro033@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
Agreed - I think relabeling divisions as open and women (XX) divisions is the best solution. Other solutions I have heard include only regulating things at high levels of play, e.g., championships and other events that have prestigious awards. Joanna Harper has advocated the latter.
- fosho ( @fosho@lemmy.ca ) 0•1 year ago
hmm - i like the idea of removing gender from divisions and instead using another criteria that better defines an individual’s ability. that way when a trans woman goes to compete they aren’t specifically put into a category for men but rather a group of people who have relatively comparable abilities. sortof like weight classes. i mean - it’s still kinda shitty because now someone has to decide based on difficult criteria who belongs where, but i think that’s a step in the right direction. i’m would hope that for trans folks, the idea that they are put into a gendered category is what is the most discriminatory rather than a skill/ability category. however, the end result would likely be the same just with different labels. maybe that’s what matters most? i don’t know. no easy answers.
- yarr ( @yarr@lemmy.fmhy.ml ) 1•1 year ago
and eventually it most likely would be by someone
Err, this has already happened quite a few times.
- CynAq ( @CynAq@kbin.social ) 9•1 year ago
That’s not nuance, that’s just ignorance and a knee-jerk reaction to a very complicated issue which has to be left to experts, who, in addition to being normal people with compassion and love like most of us towards their fellow humans, know the most about their topic of expertise than any of us.
- hydro033 ( @hydro033@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
It is indeed nuance. Just because you’re not well read or educated on the topic, doesn’t mean I am not. I have been thinking about these things for years and years, and I do indeed have a formal education in biology. So, no, not a knee-jerk reaction, sorry. Again, I am all for letting trans individuals transition and exist how they want, and I am all for respecting pronoun usage, and whatever else - that is compassion towards fellow humans. I am just pointing out two aspects of this debate where I have my own thoughts that have some slight pushback on progressive perspectives.
- CynAq ( @CynAq@kbin.social ) 5•1 year ago
If you were as “well read” as you think you are, you would know how much bullshit you’re spewing right now. Especially about children getting the gender affirming care they need without any need interference from “well-mean” idiots like you.
Your “concern” is potentially killing young people, and you’re here talking out of your ass, convinced you have compassion for people.
- Aesthesiaphilia ( @Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social ) 5•1 year ago
Nuanced opinions are worthy of discussion. That’s not what I’ve seen on the community in question.
- PenguinJuice ( @PenguinJuice@kbin.social ) 2•1 year ago
Racism is disgusting but transpobia? I don’t believe that’s hate speech. People can not like something but not wish death on the person or outright hate who they are as a person. People are allowed to dislike certain behaviors. It’s not comparable to racism and its definitely not hate speech.
- AnonTwo ( @AnonTwo@kbin.social ) 20•1 year ago
but transpobia? I don’t believe that’s hate speech.
Uhhh…no, that is hate speech. It’s in definition damnit.
I’m going down this thread and holy crap did you 180 from normal conversation into downright bigot.
- szczur ( @szczur@kbin.social ) 11•1 year ago
But you do not disagree with someone doing or believing something. By defending transphobia you disagree with someone being one thing or the other. Because transphobia isn’t based on disagreeing with what trans people are doing or believe in. It disagrees with their fundamental right to exist and wants to take it away. It’s no different from racism or antisemitism.
That’s the difference you seem to miss.
- minnieo ( @minnieo@kbin.social ) 10•1 year ago
transphobia literally = “outright hating who someone is as a person”. are you okay???
- HelixDab ( @HelixDab@kbin.social ) 44•1 year ago
“Disagreements” are for things like tax milage, or whether or not a school needs a new football field. “Disagreements” are not for things like, “jews should be gassed”, or “trans people are all pedophiles”.
- szczur ( @szczur@kbin.social ) 32•1 year ago
Disagreeing with someone having the right to exist is not an opinion.
- Harlan_Cloverseed ( @Harlan_Cloverseed@kbin.social ) 28•1 year ago
No, we’re not going to let shitheads like this ruin our community.
- Cylusthevirus ( @Cylusthevirus@kbin.social ) 25•1 year ago
If your “certain view” is that trans people, other queer people, and/or anyone left of Tucker Carlson shouldn’t exist, you’ve opted out of the social contract of tolerance and should expect to be shunned.
Tolerance is either a two way street or a suicide pact and I’m not here to watch people die so the worst dregs of humanity can spew their garbage.
- PenguinJuice ( @PenguinJuice@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Whoa, I would never wish someone wouldn’t exist anymore, wtf? Most moderate people I know just don’t like the behavior, they don’t hate the people… I know assholes exist who actually want to kill people who disagree with them but that exists on both sides of the aisle.
- Aesthesiaphilia ( @Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social ) 11•1 year ago
It’s not “behavior”, it’s who they are.
- minnieo ( @minnieo@kbin.social ) 9•1 year ago
Most moderate people I know just don’t like the behavior
what does that even mean? what is ‘the behavior’? i’d like to see you try and tell me without generalizing literally millions of people
- fosho ( @fosho@lemmy.ca ) 3•1 year ago
you could always … you know … not care. your life would be so much more fulfilling and meaningful if you stopped sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong.
- z500 ( @z500@startrek.website ) 3•1 year ago
Yes, because certainly this time around people are going to stop at side eye and clucking their tongues. Because it’s nothing but a difference of opinion, you see.
- fedosyndicate ( @fedosyndicate@kbin.social ) 25•1 year ago
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. […] for it may easily turn out that [the intolerant] are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; [the intolerant] may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive […] We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to [other crimes] as criminal.
- spicy_biscuits ( @spicy_biscuits@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
Exactly this why is this so hard for these motherfuckers to understand
- slicedcheesegremlin ( @slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social ) 13•1 year ago
complexity does not inherently make your argument better. “Slavery is is horrible and evil but free black people shouldn’t have the right to vote” is a nuanced opinion, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t racist and terrible.
- Aesthesiaphilia ( @Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
I agree in principle but that’s not a great example
- spicy_biscuits ( @spicy_biscuits@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
Look up the tolerance paradox and then suck my dick
- yarr ( @yarr@lemmy.fmhy.ml ) 0•1 year ago
What if my ideas are so fragile that mere exposure to a contrasting opinion makes them crumble?
- TheaoneAndOnly27 ( @TheaoneAndOnly27@kbin.social ) 12•1 year ago
Is there a way to block seeing any comments or posts from exploding heads?
- rideranton ( @rideranton@kbin.social ) 10•1 year ago
You can block domains if you click on the domain next to the post, go to the sidebar and block it like a magazine
- shatteredsteel ( @shatteredsteel@kbin.social ) 0•1 year ago
That hasn’t been functioning for me, I’ve had to go to each magazine individually to block them.
If I click the button on the instance it doesn’t do anything, I still see the posts in my feed. I’ve tried on a few of the non-english instances (since I don’t know other languages).
- Haan ( @Haan@kbin.social ) 11•1 year ago
Why do you care? Is kbin.social not a free speech platform? If not, I’ll find somewhere else to go.
I don’t even agree with these folks, but if people are going to start raising a big stink because people are saying things they don’t like, I’m out.
- szczur ( @szczur@kbin.social ) 25•1 year ago
There’s free speech in good faith, and the one in the bad. But that’s not even about that. If someone’s speech is basically “all trans people are a pedophiles and belong on the cross in defence of good christian values” (not a direct quote, just a representation) it’s not free speech. It’s hate speech and that kind of speech is not protected. Free speech is meant to protect voicing opinions. Thinking some people are not deserving of worthy living is not an opinion.
- Harlan_Cloverseed ( @Harlan_Cloverseed@kbin.social ) 23•1 year ago
Buh bye
- BobVersionFour ( @BobVersionFour@kbin.social ) 6•1 year ago
I don’t even agree with these folks> if you sit at a table with 7 nazi that table contain 8 nazi