Since this post was linked from another thread, @Difficult_Bit_1339, you've unfairly characterized @socialjusticewizard as a beehaw.org user coming here "trying to stir up shit" as you've phrased it. Their sh.itjust.works account predates their beehaw.org account by two weeks. This post, the one we're commenting on right now, is NOT clearly labeled as being the rules for vote posts. It's just named "changes." You should consider putting the rules for vote posts in the sidebar and in the vote posts themselves.

If you want to label me as a beehaw.org user coming here "trying to stir up shit," too, so be it. At least my first account was from beehaw.org, and I came here looking to see sh.itjust.works and lemmy.world posts. At this point, I'm entirely done with this instance based on the overall handling of this situation and will be using my @[email protected] account for the purposes this account was originally meant to serve. Here is some advice I have, as a sort of exit interview.

1. Be nicer. Come on. The way you moderate this community will influence the way this entire instance operates. Your rudeness and dismissiveness sets the tone for the entire instance and how people will perceive users with @sh.itjust.works as part of their identity
2. Define an executive process for defederation, just as you already have an executive process for moderation. Defederation is part of moderation and 1 month is not a fast turn around for this sort of situation
3. Increase the transparency of the audit scripts you're using to tally votes by linking a link to a git repo containing the script. I think it's fair to say that your automated script for what the vote talley is and what someone reading through the vote sees as being the vote results are quite different

Not to be mean, but what are you talking about? This is one of the most federated instances I know of

Aye

Charlottesville, 2017. As you might recall, they also committed an act of terrorism and killed a woman

Actions speak louder than words, and that admin has done nothing to follow up on the things he says he will do

They have their house. We have ours. All we're discussing today is “Should we stop letting them into our house when they come over?”

I keep seeing this discussion framed as a "slippery slope in regards to defederation" but what about the "slippery slope of letting unchecked unacceptable behavior continue?" Why is that not a slippery slope concern?

It's selection bias. I wrote a big, long comment just now before seeing this. sh.itjust.works has already bled users, even if the MAU has continued to grow. It's just that the makeup of those monthly active users is shifting, and will continue to do so the longer nothing is done one way or the other

I logged into this account after several days of inactivity to participate in this discussion and not just appear as someone from another instance. I left this instance because this decision-making process about what to do about an instance whose users consistently harass users on other instances was too arduous and was beginning to give me concerns that this problem would fester and get out of control. Not only that, but I picked the instance I moved to after a discussion with a few users about 4 other instances (lemmy.world was added to that list later in that conversation) that had moved a little bit faster on this issue. This was three days ago.

There are people who I've talked to that are still keeping an eye on things and intend to leave or stay depending on the outcome of how this discussion goes. The things that absolutely must be communicated are what the defederation policy will be, and what kind of time frame can be expected for executing a defederation based on this policy.

The point I'm trying to make is that "All of us have seen the content by now, and we're still here" is a form of selection bias, and is precisely the concern. Not everyone who has seen the content is still here. The users who have stayed are more okay with seeing this kind of content than the entire set of users who started on the instance. Whatever decision you come to will influence the long-term community that matures here on sh.itjust.works. Whether you think you're leaving it purely in the hands of all of us or not, the timing of when you're holding the discussion and having the vote, and all of this changes the outcomes of the discussion and the vote. If you keep putting this decision off forever, the more favorable the community will become for and towards what the exploding-heads community represents to the greater fediverse.

And it bothers me every single day that someone who entered office with a 44% approval rating and a 42% disapproval rating won 49.9% of the vote. He was over 50% disapproval within 1 month of his term, and under 40% approval by his second month. This was someone that even his political allies called a racist and dangerous demagogue before continuing on to endorse him.

That is not a feature available in either Lemmy or KBin yet. The primary directive, if you ask me, of online community building is you must not allow your users to come to mental harm. It would be nice to keep exploding-heads from becoming a nazi echo chamber by having realistic content appearing in their feed, but we shouldn't let that stop us from preventing their continued abuse of our rules

I've reported multiple users multiple times from exploding-heads for such behavior (against trans people). The admin of exploding heads has been documented as saying that's fine (though I'd have to go find that thread again). That instance is not moderated to a standard of decency, and its active users have developed a reputation for raiding

gotcha. Thanks for the info

They did test librewolf. How does arkenfox compare to that?

My objections to brave have less to do with privacy concerns and more to do with concerns that I have giving Google full license to be who develops the blink engine and determine the future of the web

Agreed. all of the bot replication content I've seen on Lemmy getting automatically copied from Reddit has been hard to engage with because the titles aren't informative and the comments are awash with bot replication comments with no engagement from Lemmy users. I understand the urge to pump up the content here but I think the replication bots actually reduce the ability to engage and enjoy Lemmy.

The question I would ask is, what do people value a out the fediverse and the threadiverse? Personally, I like being able to engage with excited and interested users. The replication bots are noise standing in the way of this

Then why use a platform with federation / defederation as a core feature? Why not Nostr or SSB? Why activitypub?

Basically, every major instance that isn't sh.itjust.works, lemmy.world, lemmygrad.ml, or exploding-heads. They moderate in favor of "federate by default, defederate if it becomes a problem, refederate if the problem is addressed"

Aye, and here's why. Exploding heads are not coming into our space and having discussions in good faith. They are acting as a troll farm and being abusive toward our members, and generally not following the rules of the road laid out for our instance. "Beehaw defederated us and I didn't like it" isn't a valid argument as this is a different situation. Beehaw defederated from here because they couldn't deal with the scale of moderating all the traffic coming from here which including abusive troll accounts. Exploding Heads is going by the alt right playbook and is almost exclusively being abusive, even if it's a small number of people.

And it is noticable. I see some people arguing that individuals who don't like that instance should just block it themselves, but that's not an available function of the threadiverse yet. You're saying that our server at large should endure abuse coming from that server because someday the functionality may be implemented for individuals to handle it themselves. I don't think this is a good moderation strategy and will only allow abusive actors to find foothold.

They cannot