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.
🇳🇱
@freemo@qoto.org
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 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.
@freemo
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.