🇳🇱
NOTE: If anyone wants to be added to this list just let me know.
Ok so this seems to be most of the people who publicly stated they had interest in developing the "United Federation of Instances". All of you should have gotten the first draft and opinions were heard and discussed.
Today I will be moving the first draft over to git (either git.qoto.org or gitlab.com). From there I will encourage each of you to provide suggestions as to edits there, and raise discussions in issues. This way we will be public and have an open transparent forum that keeps the changes on record.
While public feedback is being debated on the proposal I will begin a rough draft on the complete by laws (which will try to represent the broader points in the proposal document). That too will be on gitlab and open to discussion
From there as the movement grows we can begin discussing launching it.
I suggest all communication on the fediverse about this use the #UFI hashtag so it is easily searchable.
Since this is a public post I will now share the link to the early draft here, please keep in mind everything here is open for discussion so if anyone doesnt like the current direction, please speak up, we want you to be heard.
https://jeffreyfreeman.me/files/united_federation_of_instances_proposal.pdf
@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @ichoran @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq #mastoadmin #fediblock
Agreed, needs a comma, ill add it... Try to save your bigger edits though for git so anything controversial can be discussed.
@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk@qoto. How does the silent majority, that might feel that discussing an idea is giving credit to the idea, factor in, if at all? Democracy might work as a viable solution against absolutism, but since these concepts mostly apply to statehoods instead of discourses I think there is an error of categories going on here. Also 500 characters is not enough to reply (participate) in this thread.
At qoto we have a much higher character count, some other instances have it as well. That said you are welcome to wait till its on GIT where you have more characters as well, up to you.
As for those who are against the idea and wish to protest it by being silent, thats up to them. Either it will hurt their cause because they wont get a voice, or it will have their intended effect... But we cant account for people who refuse to speak.
@sozialwelten well a silent majority can be given opportunities via polling right?
It might be difficult to maintain a complete list of people that are interested in the topic over time. (And it's challenging for the character limited of a post.)
How about installing a gup.pe group? Maybe @ufi?
@skanman @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
Creating a group sounds like a good idea (was going to bring up the QOTO group server again soon which has better tools than gup.pe).
That said I think using the hashtag #UFI or #UFOI will do better for comms here. Plus once its on GIT maintaining a list here will be less critical and I think the hashtag and/or group will cover that well.
So yea, agreed basically
@floppy @ufi @skanman @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
We should probably decide if it should be
or
the latter lining up with the domain name (which i will donate to the group and not take control of).
@floppy
@skanman @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
@freemo
you know i'm in the free speech camp, but this is a good draft. things get formalized properly and it's not based on "feelings" and "blocked because i have a bad day". i may have some points but i need to think about them first :)
@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
Someone called it the first digital constitituion :) That got me excited. Plus everyone of these people were really heklpful with feedback, so we got some good heads on this.
@Ryle @ejg @floppy @jq @dashrandom @stux@masto.ai @stux@mstdn.social @stevenclyman @darnell @aebrockwell @AlanOutback @Gaythia @ichoran @khird @robryk @Romaq @skanman @tatzelbrumm @trinsec @john @tsomof
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @Ryle @ejg @floppy @jq @dashrandom @stux@masto.ai @stux@mstdn.social @stevenclyman @darnell @aebrockwell @AlanOutback @Gaythia @ichoran @khird @robryk @skanman @tatzelbrumm @trinsec @john @tsomof
"This is a revolution, dammit! We're going to have to offend SOMEbody!" John Adams, 1776
@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
I am an instance owner and admin and I never heard of a draft or one being developed. Looking at my pinned post, I wanted to start a discussion with all instance owners and have a few people interested in this too in my replies on the post.
Sounds like if we had the same intent you should just join us and propose edits.. We would love to hear your ideas. The Gitlab is up so just hop on in and create any issues or merge requests and we will all discuss it.
@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
- getting the wording of point 1 of the coc absolutely water-tight is critical. it was fine in the previous qoto tos, but when you apply it to a broader scale that a federation of servers is "Hate-based racism, sexism, and other hateful speech,[...]" isn't going to cut it. everything can be hateful speech with enough twisting. ideally it would be something like from hacker ethics: "Hackers should be judged by their hacking, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position.". then, meritocracy has fallen from grace.
- put down what the expected response time for moderation is. people sleep, have other things to do, etc. you can't always have a moderation in place after an hour.
@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
I agree.. the proposal is meant to summarize the basic jist of it.. the bylaws document and Code of Ethics/Conduct documetn I write seperately will be much more detailed. I also agree the wording is very critical to strike a balance between justice and freedom.
@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
@freemo At the moment I'm flailing, but I'm not yet in a position to edit and I want to get this thing out of my head: "... communicating disrespect targeting a person's identity rather than their character. This behavior would often be characterized as (but not limited to) racism, sexism... (extend definitive list, avoid "hate speech" as a phrase.. and again "including but not limited to" is a wonderful phrase to use.)
TRUST ME, when I interact with flat earthers, I get mighty cranky and I'm sure they could label it as "hate speech." But I'm clearly not attacking their identity, just their bloody-minded stupidity.
@Romaq Can you at least crete and issue ther eand just copy and paste it in, this way we keep it.
@freemo Yeah, I just need to get moving to recover from work. Gawd this thing keeps moving and I want to follow what's going on while I'm doing what I really ought to be doing instead.
@freemo I now have the git repository local. The Git GUI doesn't show me branches and changes, so I did it wrong. OF COURSE. But that's ok, my opportunity to learn, and being able to see changes would be more useful, I'd think. I'll post my message where the issue is already being discussed if there is anything it would contribute at that point.
@freemo AND I deleted the local copy as it didn't show me anything of what has currently been changed, so I'm not clear it will do what I intended and I didn't want a "this doesn't work" project folder where I've begun putting Mastodon stuff.
I'll figure out what I need to know in due course.
@Ryle Thank you. I missed seeing this before I posted a suggestion about it, but I was intent I not lose the thought I had at that moment. My current situation has me hella distracted to where I'm setting alarms for myself so I don't miss going to the loo when I need to.
I'll jump in there once I've shed my work funk off.
It is a silly word. Hate speech had a very clear legal definition, but it has since been used for political benefit by those controlling a narrative. They use genocide selectively, too. The same as ‘war crime’. Others are ‘hate crime’ or ‘gender based violence’. They are useful if a definition is agreed upon, but that never happens.
What is the desperate need for a code and censorship, anyway? We all behave differently. We have different things we hate to hear. That’s why we can choose with whom we associate. Pretending we all agree that words are harmful, then continuing to reach some code as to what can be said and how, must have some other motive.
Apparently, the same reasons that cause freedom loving people to throw Assange under the bus, is what drives this appeasing fascists bull. Who would have guessed. It’s all about doing business
@Ryle And I've posted there, hopefully a useful approach. I have seen "Hate speech had a very clear legal definition", but then you have the problem of how one jurisdiction may currently define the term legally vs. another jurisdiction, if they define it at *all*. We could use the UN version, which may be totally disagreeable to people in countries who never signed off on that.
But... hopefully there is a solution that simply does without the specific term "hate speech."
@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
Looks like a good proposal.
In general, I'm not a friend of content restrictions
— in my not so humble opinion, the "intellectual house standard":
Creativity is combining facts no-one has connected before.
also applies to discursive context ("bubbles") in Social Media,
and there will always be _someone_ who chooses to take offense.
We can't let them ruin the creative exchange for everyone else.
Now that I have access to the gitlab, I put some thoughts/edits/references into my own tatzelbranch.
https://gitlab.com/ufoi/constitution/-/blob/tatzelbranch/proposal.pdf
Merge as you see fit ...
@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux@mstdn.social @stux@masto.ai @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq
I am following you so as long as your toots are not private, I can read them and it's fine.
The 3 is not clear. I feel like a comma is missing:
If a user explicitly asks you to disengage explicit calls to
dogpile will not be acceptable.