For those curious it seems one person claimed this was due to a conversationn i had where asked about if we would block child porn... I said it isnt something we ever faced and didnt have set rules on it, but i am pretty certain we would block it.
Anyway shortly after that I had the conversation witht he mods and as expectted agreed we would block it, our TOS was updated accordingly with the following:
"Offending servers will only be silenced, not blocked, blocks will be reserved for technical assaults only such as DDoS attacks, or legal issues such as sexual abuse and child porn."
But of course whoever handles tthat directory did absolutely **no** due diligence and didnt even once reach out to us to fact check.
QT: https://qoto.org/@freemo/109371530724816347
๐ณ๐ฑ
@freemo@qoto.org
@freemo
Who handles the joinmastodon listing choices?
do you believe this was a mistake or more targeted?
@_foxaru The people who run that can be reached at hello@joinmastodon.org
My impression is a few people trying to dig up dirt about us fabricated/twisted/exaggerated things and tried to convince them to take us down.
They have a history of negligence where they will take servers off without doing due diligence or even contacting the server to discussed with them. We were taken off twice and both times they reinstated us and both times itt was because they never bothered to act responsibility by reaching out to us or investigating the situation first.
So my guess is itts more negligence than direct animosity.
@freemo How can we help?
@quesoloAna send an email to the email mentioning in the post I quote... it may help.
@freemo done!
Have a nice day
@quesoloAna Very much appreciated
This sounds like something I talk about a lot, actually. Scientists, generally speaking, will have a method on how to do things. We're used to SOPs and process is often our thing.
The majority of the world doesn't think like that. If your instant and immediate reaction isn't what they want, then you're automatically against them.
I'm not going to write a novel, but look at how the non-scientists in the world handle information on things like COVID or climate change. If it changes, it's inherently bad in their opinion. Only the first opinion they heard matters, to a large number of people, and they'll go to the grave believing it.
TLDR; scientists and non-scientists often struggle with communication. Thank you for coming to my TED talk :)
@BE very valid points for sure.
The idea that having a process, as you stated, is "squirrelly" seems like madness to the scientific brain. If there were a great answer to this then we probably wouldn't have so many crises that scientists understand and the non-scientists do not in the world.
I don't envy your position of trying to explain your positions all of the time to other people.
@BE I know right.. like "the moderators vote to any changes in our rules" is somehow the same as saying 'we love child porn"... like come the fuck on...
Yeah, I don't know either. Just guessing, but it's not child porn, there is none here, so it's got be something else.
Maybe because of all the new instances, they can be more selective now? You were recently talking about advancing/improving the code so I thought that might be it. I don't write open source code, I just write for myself so I really don't understand the politics of that at all.
@BE @freemo Stephen Colbert joked that Bush 43 believes the same thing on Wednesday that he did on Monday, regardless of what happened Tuesday.
I know smart but not science-minded people who think changing guidance around masks was proof that epidemiologists donโt know what theyโre talking about.
People think in terms of absolute certainly and donโt grok how others make assessments based on limited or changing data.
@BE @freemo I see that phenomenon in my own #InfoSec work all the time.
People want certainty on a decision when really there are perfectly valid arguments in both directions. One of the first things I teach new practitioners is sometimes we just have to pick a direction and go with it.
Our job is not only helping people manage risk but also helping them feel like their risk is managed.
@freemo Email sent to the Mastodon Council. ;-) Thanks to all for their great work in supporting Mastodon at this time.
@mguhlin Your support is much appreciated
@freemo , might I suggest a bit of all encompassing language for consideration? "We will heavily moderate any content depicting violent, forceful, non consensual activities." Or words to that effect. This can cover abuse of animals, war, violent fights, and rape. Or any other non consensual activity, without having to generate a comprehensive list. It makes it hard to say "but you won't moderate ____" if it is any form of abuse. It may help undercut objections.
@JonKramer It may be past that point, but i am considering rewording our TOS now.
It's easier to smack down an instance you are kinda jealous of rather than bother with things like checking facts so long as you have an excuse to do so. God forbid anyone get confused with the facts.