@freemo @arteteco @Surasanji #QOTO rules on the front page have changed, it's not a #freespeech #instance anymore:
https://www.diffchecker.com/vr1bXWjQ
Can you please remove the #SJW #propaganda from the rules? On other instances SJWs use these rules to silence everyone they disagree with. I don't care if being a freespeech instance gets you blocked from other bad instances. Mastodon is open, we need instances that aren't controlled by SJW trolls. People registered here, because they want to escape #censorship
@dialyzer
Hi, can you please be more specific on what parts of the rules you are suggesting to remove/modify?
Thanks for the feedback
🇳🇱
I second what arteco said. Please be more specific. What part of the rules do you object to and what part do you feel violates your right to expression.
Also as @goto said we are a STEM instance, our purpose is to enjoy the company of mutually respectful people in STEM. Our primary purpose is to be useful and productive to the stem community.
@dialyzer @freemo @arteteco @Surasanji How does this work? What is it doing?
Also I'd like to point out in terms of censorship banning or asking people to take down posts (or doing it by force) is very very rare. Unless you are explicitly screaming hateful things at people and plastering swastikas all over peoples walls, or calling people racial slurs because you hate their race or whatever, then your good.
Since day one we have always had just one rule. Be kind to others, as long as you do that we dont censor based on opinions. That is still true.
In practice I suggest you focus more on looking at who we ban than a list of rules. Generally have you ever seen us ban someone that you felt was an overstep of power?
Perhaps what we should do is just be more transparent about who we ban. Post it publicly so you can see for yourself if you feel the level of moderation is appropriate.
@freemo @dialyzer @arteteco 99.9% of the bans I've done are from advertisers. I can only think of one or two times we ever banned or silenced anyone, and it was entirely for the reasons listed above.
This is a community, and if one member is damaging to the community as a whole we request they step it back. If they continue, we have to move forward.
How we move forward, though, could perhaps be a bit more clear and transparent and I'd be happy to open up the moderation process a bit to the community at large.
@Surasanji @freemo @arteteco Thanks for the replies. I see you don't ban many people. It's cool that you warn people before banning them.
I come from platforms where moderators ban everyone without reason. On other instances people are really hostile against everyone who don't agree with SJW views. That's why I'm a bit scared of rules mentioning "hateful speech".
But I think this instance is fine based on what you all said.
I sympathize. Keep in mind when i originally founded this instance it it was because I was scared of sensorship. I didnt want me and others to have years of posts they invest into an account only to be banned over frivelous reasons. I saw this as a trend on facebook and it drove me to start a mastodon instance.
Similarly since being here I quickly realized as you did, that many instances would ban people instantly for respectfully sharing views not in line with the rest of the instance, usually politicial in nature. Many mastodon instances seemed worse than even facebook.
But i also didnt want to create a place like gab. Where free speech was so extreme that the content wound up being 90% hateful racism and most of the timeline was filled with swastikas and racial slurs. While such an environment might be free from censorship it is also extremely distatsteful and unenjoyable to me.
So I tried to find this happy medium. We only ban in extreme and obvious cases. But for the most part as long as you aren't being explicitly hateful your good.
I agree with everything @freemo said. I'd just add that federating is a delicate issue, you want freedom of speech, but also other instances to not block you, as that is crippling.
You want people to express themselves freely, which also means not be harassed for every post just because. And also, you want them to reach other people, that means not go into some block list (which is where many free-speech instances go).
Where is the line between hate and reasonable passion? How do you evaluate freedom?
It's very difficult to say, and I think we are also figuring it out as we go along.
So far having a very human approach (trying to solve everything by talking to people, instead of direct block) has proven to work, even if it's more time consuming. Can't say we are perfect though, and we like other users to chip in their thoughts.
I wouldn't know about making ever ban/silencing public... wouldn't want to create any feeling of public shaming or such... but maybe it wont' happen.
QOTO is *not* a „freespeech“ instance, it‘s a STEM instance. Active moderation against hate speech *on* the instance is mandatory! It‘s important to not block the *federation* of any instance (not even gab) on the *server* (users can do that on their client), but hate speech must be banned from QOTO itself.