So someone messaged me privately and asked how absolute this is.. like would we block an instance calling for genocide. I feel my response is import to reiterate here, so here it is:
Its not just about the authorities, it is about the people whose lives are at risk by that call to genocide having the right to see those posts and use that information to look out for their own safety... If someone is doxed, they should know, if someone is threatened, they should know, and they should be able to take action.
Someone saying violent things online doesnt guarantee some police officer will meander by and take them down. The law only tends to get involved once someone is reported, and sometimes not even then. No one will be reporting a site if no one can see or know it is there.
The question is, if someone is being physically threatened and having their life in jeopardy how are you helping them by blocking the privileges of the **victim** and disallowing the victim the right to see the threat placed against them?
In short, I refuse to take away rights from the victim simply because there is a violent bad actor out there. If the victim doesn't want to see it they simply need to import the block list and the problem is solved for them, so why not keep the power in the victims hands?
🇳🇱
@freemo@qoto.org
@thekazath I am happy to hear that, and it is great to have you here.
@freemo Where are these blocklists that I might import?
@freemo that’s a nuanced point you make. Said victim if kept in the dark by some auto-block feature could then turn around later and say - but I never knew this was going on! At least if I’d known I could have done something about it!
@lavenderlens Yup, exactly... empower victims, let them decide.
@freemo also, instances don't call for genocide. Users call for genocide, through their toots & boosts.
Besides, even if an instance's entire user population calls for genocide, someone needs to keep an eye on that crap.
@freemo Well, I guess it is not as easy as to make this a victims only problem. The call - for genocide as an example - is also out there. And granting it reaching more audience is also a problem.
Consider manipulative disinformation. Here, how much audience it reaches becomes even more of a problem.
I see both sides and framing this as taking away victims rights might be an oversimplifying approach to a more complex issue.
@bpub Im not sure i agree, reaching more of an audience, especially when that audience is knownn good actors isnt a problem at all.
An instance of bad actors or even questionable actors federating with such a server, maybe... but a bunch of people on a server with strict no hate policy who have all proven themselves to be good actors... no i dont see the problem with information about a genocidal server reaching them being an issue.
As for manipulative disinformation, that is all the more important to have access to for a STEM instance or in general because then you have the ability to correct the information. What is ddangerous is allowing that information to exist in a bubble where people hear it day after day and are so isolated no one is there to provide them with the other side.
@ambv this thread has similar vibes to what you posted recently
@freemo Thanks for detailed explanation & history. I'm even happier being on QOTO with that info in hand. This seems like a great community.