Luckily then they're not the "arbiters of truth" for the platform, eh? Just for the instance they own themselves. You are free to disagree with them, and not go to their garden parties any more. Doesn't change that it's their garden, and their party.

in flagrant opposition to Lemmy’s ENTIRE PURPOSE

Hrm... no. I tried, and nothing about the Lemmy site says that instance owners aren't free to moderate their sites as they see fit. In fact that they can is cited as a benefit of the system, since everyone is also free to run their own instance.

(edit)
Look, I don't even disagree, but no need to make shit up to call admins out for. The subject matter of the topic is enough to call them out for if you're so inclined.

[+] [email protected] -8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Really, I need citations for a post that already provides an example? Just pick a server and look at the modlogs keyword: misinfo. Here's a salient example:

Luckily then they’re not the “arbiters of truth” for the platform...

That's actually a part of the problem. The complete lack of responsibility or accountability for anyone on here. Like it or not all it takes is a handful of self-righteous admins to ruin it for the entire platform. What you tout as a Good is quite the opposite in the long run.

[–] Carighan 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Really, I need citations for a post that already provides an example?

The citation needed is about you saying its both rampant and oppressive, something the server logs don't provide data for.

That’s actually a part of the problem. The complete lack of responsibility or accountability for anyone on here. Like it or not all it takes is a handful of self-righteous admins to ruin it for the entire platform. What you tout as a Good is quite the opposite in the long run.

But how is that different from any other website? Someone owns them, either an individual or a group. Naturally, they can just about do whatever they desire, including pulling the plug. And more specifically, how would you change that. Especially because:

You still need moderation and administration. If for no other reason than should you grow big enough, you got obligations to provide this in regards to illegal, hateful and discriminatory speech and disinformation in the EU.
Any moderation will sooner or later upset the moderated person.
Any arbitration for this will inevitably come upon a case - see this thread - where it makes someone else partisan to either side.

So you'll have this problem anyways. No matter what you do. With Lemmy in particular... run your own instance if you desire full control of moderation. That's what you get that way. Just be aware that there's a solid chance someone will be unhappy with your moderation at some point. Inevitably.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Here's some more reading for you.

It's not a matter of 'being upset with a moderator's decision'. Moderators are overstepping their mandate and it is a problem. Say something rude? Banned? Fine. Obviously against the rules. Politely say anything a core clique in that community disagrees with, factual or not, and there's a non-zero chance you get your comment deleted at best because a mod+ disagrees, and it happens way too often.

But how is that different from any other website?

In other places there are extrinsic factors that influence how moderation is done. Reddit for example is concerned first and foremost with ensuring it is a place Ad agencies are comfortable working with. Reddit would strip moderators of their roles specifically because they weren't doing their job right, and upsetting the community or ad agencies. More to the point: they have a Code of Conduct that is standardized for the ENTIRE platform. (AFAICT the problem with the mods being so problematic here is likely due to this mass exodus of incompetent mods from Reddit, but that is a hypothesis that needs further testing and out of my ability to research.)

At best this whole problem is that the Mods can't be bothered to actually investigate reports, likely due to inadequate mod tools. Someone reports misinformation, or a troll, or rudeness and the accused gets punished with zero thought as to the veracity of the claim. I do not think that is it though. There are a couple mods who have a MO of abusing mod powers after verbally abusing a user just to get the final word, at least that I am aware of or experienced first hand.

And finally, I find the argument to 'join the cartel of corrupt Mods if you don't like it'... counterproductive. I personally do not want full control of moderation. I want moderation to be regulated/standardized because Lemmy atm is very much like the Old West.

[–] Carighan 0 points 4 months ago

Sure, but as long as modding is a volunteer position that won't change. If for no other reason that like you say, it's not a position that motivates you to investigate reports.

Couple that with how toxic and negative Lemmy is overall, and it doesn't surprise me that the raw volume of reports will lead to a very high amount of "yeah, sure" bans with mininal investigation.

Plus the last part wasn't meant as a "join in" thing, rather, if you desire an instance that does not abide by bad moderation, the fediverse puts the onus on you to create that instance. Everyone is free to do so, within some limitations such as - and that's a very very valid thing - a need for adequate moderation tools.