I've been thinking a lot about the discourse around moderation, Black folks' experiences, and the culture here. This is a longer post to dig a bit into how we can discuss and change the culture here to be more inclusive and equitable and just.
First step is to stop doing band-aid solutions. Folks who keep saying "we're a community of builders" in response to social critiques or saying "just make your own server or move" need to take a step back and consider that is coming off as ignorance at best and racist at worst. It's a band-aid solution that doesn't truly solve the inherent problem that impacts the network as a whole.
People shouldn't *have* to move servers. The server ought to change and be more inclusive, which means tackling the culture of that server and how it moderates. And if they do decide to move servers, they shouldn't have to deal with it again there either. It's the overall culture that contributes to the harmful bigotry people may face in a server.
Culture exists everywhere, including in a "community of builders." If you don't deal with the culture that causes harm to some people, then you can't claim your culture is "inclusive" or that there is an "engineering" solution to a cultural problem.
Dr. Flowers (shengokai@zirk.us) made some excellent threads that analyze the situation on Mastodon -- specifically social side of it. https://zirk.us/@shengokai/109380372543079977 Is one of the critiques. Go read them all! He spoke with folks who been here a long time and dug deep for his analyses.
Now, is there a solution to the issues of culture here that have consciously or not caused harm to marginalized folks?
Yes, there can be by coming together and having these discussions.
However, only engineering solutions isn't gonna cut it. Although Mastodon does need some engineering solutions (the moderation can be improved upon greatly with some better engineering. The protocol is wonky that could be improved too), but that will not fix the culture.
What fixes the culture?
Discussions like these. People willing to listen, to be uncomfortable, to confront harmful attitudes, and unlearn and build up new ways of being.
That's part of what being in community IS. We need to unlearn all the time. We need to listen, be uncomfortable, be flexible, be willing to change.
Change is necessary. It is not either good or bad - it's a neutral force that can be weaponized in a bad way (see Elongated Musky's twitter takeover) or in a good way (people building more just, equitable, sustainable, and accessible platforms).
But change is needed. Change needs to be done on a tech level, a culture level, and on a personal level.
So think about behaviors witnessed here -- behaviors you do too -- think about what norms Mastodon users, especially those who helped build it or been here a long time, enforce.
Some of the norms are good. Such as people defaulting to using alt-text for their photos and video screenshots (thank you!).
Others are a good idea that can be weaponized in painful ways
For example the CW: first situation I'll use to discuss this is: its utility to avoid triggering panic or pain for those with trauma is good. This is being mindful of those around us and seeking to create a culture of care.
Second situation: people trying to force Black folks and other marginalized identities to cover their posts because it made the person uncomfortable is harmful. This puts the marginalized person in a position of having to CW all their posts as the oppression faced often colors their interactions in most spaces, so trying to write about their experiences without mentioning it would be difficult. (It's difficult for me as a disabled nonbinary person, and I don't have to deal with the intersection of race too.)
In the first CW situation, the poster makes a conscious choice to be mindful of others - the poster makes the decision and holds agency over it. Their decision is theirs alone.
In the second CW situation, readers with more privilege (thus more power) try to coerce the poster with less privilege (thus less power) into a specific action to lessen the reader's cognitive dissonance and uncomfortable emotions. This is a power imbalance, and if numerous people with more power and privilege barrage the poster, the power imbalance tips into harassment.
If we examine who gets targeted the most for the "put a CW on this" when sharing experiences, we can also see an imbalance where marginalized populations get hit harder - this is a consequence of the power imbalance within the culture itself.
To be clear, for someone with less privilege, they hold less power in these situations. So asking a poster to put in alt-text on an image would not fit the second situation I described above. The less privileged individual is seeking access to what everyone else already has. That is not and should not be equated with someone who seeks to silence or cover-up the story of another regardless of intent.
That power balance inherent within privilege is also a cultural aspect that needs discussed. I used CW as a way to model thinking about how norms within a culture create power imbalances. Mastodon is not immune to the wider cultures of people's home countries, and there are many countries across the world that privilege specific groups over others that can be replicated into Mastodon's culture consciously or unconsciously. That needs examined too.
Norms of how discussions and change ought to go also need examined and possibly changed. Think about interactions here, think about whose voices get heard the most, think about who moderates, who owns servers, who writes the code, etc. All of these factors have a role in building and shaping culture.
And yes, even code can be biased as it is written by human beings, and we're biased beings. (There is an excellent book by a Black author that discusses this actually called
Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code by Ruha Benjamin).
These are important questions if we are to build a community that is equitable, just, consensual, accessible, sustainable.
Yes, this seems like a lot! But that's why we do it through conversations. With actions that build up over time. Nothing can or should be done all at once. Community building takes *time* and commitment.
Make sure to listen to those most marginalized. When we care and uplift our most vulnerable, giving them access and support, then we help all of us.
Thanks for reading!
The challenge is to create in Mastodon what society overall cannot create. That's a big challenge.
The current US society and similar ones throughout the world. Ones where a privileged class does not respect 'others'.
I am of the privileged class and don't like that attitude.
If society itself were fixed, the Mastodon problem would be fixed. That's impossible but true.
It's not impossible. That's what I'm pushing back upon. It's been done in the past and it can be done again. The way US society is built does not have to remain as racist, transphobic, ableist, and homophobic as it currently is. We can change that culture and alter the systems.
Just as we can change the overall -- across many federated servers -- the culture than harms BIPOC folks. We can change that through conscious and consensual discussions that take steps and leaps toward equitable and just ways of being. A top down approach from society is not necessarily the only way to change culture here.
We can do it online as a model and then transform larger society. We can build it with one another to practice and then push it outward. That is possible and is being done throughout the world. Calling this process impossible or dismissing it by saying it must be done from top-down is a form of silencing tactic, that I don't appreciate.
Especially in a decentralized network like this one, where experiments in new ways of being together are happening. I am hopeful that we can create through our relations with one another and thus build it outward to transform the world a more just, equitable, loving, accessible, consensual, and sustainable society. It is possible, so if you are going to keep saying the world, "impossible," I would suggest learning to be more open to imagining new ways of being. Thanks!
I am open to thoughts. I don't have any at the moment. As I said above, all I know is this is a big challenge.
I'm on qoto.org, which has the quoting capability that https://zirk.us/@shengokai/109380372543079977 mentions in one of his threads was a vital component for the black community. It is available on Qoto because the LGBTQ community agreed it was helpful for them. Better to bring the devil into the light.
Similarly, Qoto has a _subscribe_ capability that allows someone to watch another person's posts without revealing their information.
Qoto regularly gets beat up and de-federated because of those features. But @freemo stands by those decisions.
From an earlier post, "...People shouldn't *have* to move servers." It would be nice, but it is part of a federated service. They do not operate identically. That's a virtue and a fault. Ideally, picking a server is like choosing between a Ford and a Chevy. Sadly, that is not the case.
With appreciation...
@TheBird Beautifully said. Thank you. We rebuild from the bottom up, not the top down.
@TheBird @rmerriam I don't believe any such society has ever existed but I would love a counter example. Mammals don't have egalitarian instincts, quite the opposite. To fight against that, at large scale.. I'm not sure it's possible. That's not to say it isn't a fine thing to measure decisions by, just that strategic and tactical steps in the right direction should be taken with an eye to landing somewhere sustainable.
That's really weird response. Some mammals do have egalitarian instincts and more specifically communal instincts, but ok. Egalitarian and communal are slightly different terms here too, so maybe don't collapse my entire discussion into a strawman fallacy for you to pretend to knock over?
There has been societies that existed with more communal and/or egalitarian roles and ways of being, and there are some existing today - or trying to despite capitalism trying to consume everything to its harmful logic.
There's also a lot of evidence that *communal* and *socialist-like* societies existed too - which are not necessarily the same thing as egalitarian (though they can be that too).
For more (as I will not debate their existence as that is derailment of my thread) read the following: Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Grenbow and David Weingrow. Also see the Indigenous People's History of United States. Try reading any book by Arturo Escobar as well. This book has a lot of good researchers and authors for which you can look up their articles and books about this topic: Pluriverse: A Post-Development Dictionary
by Ashish Kothari (Editor), Ariel Salleh (Editor), Arturo Escobar (Editor), Federico Demaria (Editor), Alberto Acosta (Editor).
There's a lot of Black researchers studying this as well that I can provide bibliography for as well.
If you are not going to join me in examining what I discussed in my post -- instead calling it impossible, then it's okay to walk away and not reply.
Thanks for reading.
@TheBird @rmerriam re-reading my reply I can see how it reads "this is impossible, kthxbye". My apologies. I'm not sure this attempt will be better but, what I was trying to say is that humans (and mammals) need to feel like they are part of groups. Tribes, families, "a village" - there is a fundamental need in all of us to be part of such a group.
two important requirements for that group are size and "others". The group needs to be relatively small, tiny by modern "society" standards, and there needs to be people that can be identified as "not group". The "not group" is by necessity less than the group, from the perspective of the group.
any successful society needs to be built with the idea of supporting its members successfully finding and thriving in those groups. Small, relative to the overarching society, groups which all feel they are superior to "the rest"; exclusive.
society can only be inclusive insofar as it enables coexistent exclusivity. Attempting to work against that, to pretend that such groups shouldn't exist, is fighting against a fundamental human need. And, unfortunately, that's a losing battle.
What is posited in my thread is possible, and it's still weird of you to amend your statement with more derailing and shifting goalposts. Please read the books i mention as they tackle your claim and prove it too simplified and not accurate.
Also, again, it's ok to walk away if you cannot speak to the thread and how we can and ought to build a more inclusive culture and support BIPOC people. I made myself clear and gave you books that speak to your claim. This thread is not the place. Thanks.
@rmerriam
This is a limited view though. I'm also not entirely sure what society you reference in this reply -- is it the society in which you reside? If so, that's not representative of all societies.
There are societies that have existed that were just, equitable, consensual. We can create those societies again. It's not that society overall cannot create the culture I mentioned: it can but there is a challenge to it and it depends on what society we are speaking about.
What we create collectively online can become better than the societies in which we in-person reside. We can create a model for which to transform in-person societies -- nothing will ever be perfect as that's impossible, but we must try.