+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄 @bonifartius@qoto.org

Here's why penalizing "off-platform behavior" doesn't work:

1) Necessity. There's not any. Banning something from happening *on* your platform makes sense, because you are liable for it. You are not liable for what is done off your platform, so there's no need to police it. If you're spending money to police it, one has to wonder what ulterior motive is behind that spending.

2) Attribution. It's really hard. Moderators have quotas to meet, and have to keep average ticket handle times low. It's trivial to create an account on some other website with a target's username and start Doin' An Extremism.

The cops fall for it all the time; I've spent three weeks in jail after someone took 5 minutes to make an email account with one of my alternate usernames, and issue a bomb threat from it. If the police can't tell the difference, do you really think an overworked, underpaid moderator is going to? Get real.

3) Context. It's important. What's considered normal banter in, for example, a video game ("I'm gonna come kill you!") could be seen as a violent threat without context. Maybe an exterminator bragged on his LinkedIn about "killing over a million of the annoying things," and there's likely similar examples for hundreds if not thousands of hobbies/industries. Twitter has had this problem before, in fact it's happened to both me and an Elite Dangerous player. Only the latter got his account back.

This dovetails with point 2; Moderators typically would only have a screenshot of the reported "off-platform" behavior. At best, they would have a link to it, but remember that when following that link, they're viewing it as any other internet user, so insights they normally have as a moderator, won't be present.

4) The Future. Your users cannot predict it. If penalization for "off-platform behavior" becomes the norm, then it becomes necessary for all users, on all services, to abide by the most restrictive rules of any service that they ever plan to use, including services that may not have even been created yet.

If you think penalizing "off-platform" behavior is a good idea, switch the roles around a bit. Imagine if Walmart (or your store of choice) didn't like *your* social media posts and decided to ban you from their stores. Not some nebulous concept of an out-group member you want to see punished for existing. YOU and YOUR beliefs.

Remember point 4. Even if you're sure you're 100% clean today, what's in vogue can change quickly.

In closing, I'd like to add that if Discord is serious about removing from their platform, anybody who has had anything to do with child grooming, they're *definitely* not gonna have enough moderators to do background checks on every user who gets reported. Because they're gonna have to toss out like 90% of their moderation staff.

It just occurred to me that we should be putting out a women’s magazine

I’m going to see if there’s anything out there that is along the lines of what I am thinking

Good morning!
#wholesomeposting @wholesome

It's kinda funny, all the people on mastodon.social talking about how anti-censorship they are all of a sudden

i really hate when a superpower just invades a smaller country over some petty bullshit and kills lots of civilians

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_invasion_of_Panama

sneksip

the princess had slept for years until a prince altered her oral bacteria with a kiss and cured her atypical encephalitis 💕

Assume that retard strength is a real thing, and choose your fighter

Literally don't remember voting for my government to take sanction actions, to target individual citizens...

@becassine @timman People need to just reject the conveniences and fruits of globalism like cheap imports, a tv in every room, 2 phones per head, and all the other gay beep boop that we have been told we need.

https://twitter.com/bobscartoons/status/1496567501643300864

"Good news everyone!"

meirl https://redd.it/t08ywj https://twitter.com/it_meirl_bot/status/1496842308049780742/photo/1

@reedyn

YES