@louis The "no hates peach" and
"no harassment" clauses are a bit too ambiguous.
🇳🇱
We address that in some detail in the bylaws, though perhaps it could use better explanation.
Harassment is when you continually contact someone who has made it known they dont want to be contacted. It also includes creating alts to circumbvent bans.
Hate speech is also fairly explicitly defined in more detail.
That said if youd like to suggest some additional verbiage to make it more specific the bylaws are open for anyone right now to make suggestions, so just suggest an improved wording.
@louis@emacs.ch
@freemo @louis Glad that you replied. The circumventing bans is completely reasonable, but you already have that listed separately to the harassment.
Mastodon has plenty of tools that we can use to block content that we don't want to see, so having a policy against harassment, is kind of pointless. If there is someone that I don't want to interact with anymore, I can block them, and it doesn't need to be done on the instance level. As a moderator I've seen way too many times people claim harassment as a way to just shut down an opinion they don't like.
Now circumventing the personal blocking tools in mastodon is surely a good reason to ban someone.
> Glad that you replied. The circumventing bans is completely reasonable, but you already have that listed separately to the harassment.
Indeed we do, but while there is overlap this isnt the same.. harassment is when someone explicitly tells you to disengage and you continually engage them, or make calls to dogpile someone who has been left alone. In short if it is very clear that you were **explicitly** told contact is unwelcome, yet you intentionally and repeatidly engage the person anyway, this would be harassment.
> Mastodon has plenty of tools that we can use to block content that we don't want to see, so having a policy against harassment, is kind of pointless.
How do block calls to dogpile, you cant, you would have to block each person one by one and only **after** you are harassed. Keep in mind the rules are only against **explicit** calls to dogpile
> As a moderator I've seen way too many times people claim harassment as a way to just shut down an opinion they don't like.
You are right, this is a concern for me also. This is why harassment is very explicitly defined and not just someone being annoyed you contacted them. That said, please, if you think there is better wording just go make a merge request, everything is up for debate.
@louis@emacs.ch
