this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
234 points (65.9% liked)

Lemmy.World Announcements

29133 readers
701 users here now

This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages πŸ”₯

https://status.lemmy.world

For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.

Support e-mail

Any support requests are best sent to [email protected] e-mail.

Report contact

Donations πŸ’—

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Ko-Fi (Donate)

Bunq (Donate)

Open Collective backers and sponsors

Patreon

Join the team

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hello World,

following feedback we have received in the last few days, both from users and moderators, we are making some changes to clarify our ToS.

Before we get to the changes, we want to remind everyone that we are not a (US) free speech instance. We are not located in US, which means different laws apply. As written in our ToS, we're primarily subject to Dutch, Finnish and German laws. Additionally, it is our discretion to further limit discussion that we don't consider tolerable. There are plenty other websites out there hosted in US and promoting free speech on their platform. You should be aware that even free speech in US does not cover true threats of violence.

Having said that, we have seen a lot of comments removed referring to our ToS, which were not explicitly intended to be covered by our ToS. After discussion with some of our moderators we have determined there to be both an issue with the ambiguity of our ToS to some extent, but also lack of clarity on what we expect from our moderators.

We want to clarify that, when moderators believe certain parts of our ToS do not appropriately cover a specific situation, they are welcome to bring these issues up with our admin team for review, escalating the issue without taking action themselves when in doubt. We also allow for moderator discretion in a lot of cases, as we generally don't review each individual report or moderator action unless they're specifically brought to admin attention. This also means that content that may be permitted by ToS can at the same time be violating community rules and therefore result in moderator action. We have added a new section to our ToS to clarify what we expect from moderators.

We are generally aiming to avoid content organizing, glorifying or suggesting to harm people or animals, but we are limiting the scope of our ToS to build the minimum framework inside which we all can have discussions, leaving a broader area for moderators to decide what is and isn't allowed in the communities they oversee. We trust the moderators judgement and in cases where we see a gross disagreement between moderatos and admins' criteria we can have a conversation and reach an agreement, as in many cases the decision is case-specific and context matters.

We have previously asked moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification when this was suggested in context of murder or other violent crimes. Following a discussion in our team we want to clarify that we are no longer requesting moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification in the context of violent crimes when the crime in question already happened. We will still consider suggestions of jury nullification for crimes that have not (yet) happened as advocation for violence, which is violating our terms of service.

As always, if you stumble across content that appears to be violating our site or community rules, please use Lemmys report functionality. Especially when threads are very active, moderators will not be able to go through every single comment for review. Reporting content and providing accurate reasons for reports will help moderators deal with problematic content in a reasonable amount of time.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shatteredsword 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Chip_Rat 14 points 1 day ago (6 children)

How do I change instances? I think I'm on this one and I want off.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] RubicTopaz 50 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Lame. Jury nullification is good and necessary in this case. Saving people's lives shouldn't get you punished, regardless of your motives.

[–] Baron1avAB0rn 77 points 1 day ago (11 children)

Broseph, I can't have sympathy. The income inequality won't let me. People aren't cheering the unaliving necessarily, but the fact that one of these people actually answered for their crimes, in whatever form that took. Because courts weren't gonna make him.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] solomon42069 36 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Wow I wasn't even planning to leave but this nonsense just convinced me. Thanks!

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If you want a US based-instance

If you want a non US instance

[–] solomon42069 9 points 1 day ago

You are a gentleman and a scholar.

[–] Aermis 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Maybe I don't understand how lemmy works, but I have been here exclusively from reddit.sync. How would I change the instance? Even my user name is subject to lemmy.world.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 18 hours ago

In addition to what Blaze said, bear in mind you can use the same username on a different instance when creating a new account, only the @ part will change.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago
  • You register a new account on the new instance, using a computer is easier
  • You export the settings from the LW account (settings - Export settings)
  • You import the settings into the new account (settings - Import settings)
  • You login on the new account on Sync
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

People downvoted me to hell when I tried advising a newcomer to look for an instance that wasn't lemmy.world because the open sign-up makes them a haven for reactionaries.

Are people listening now?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

No. People never listen:-P.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Thank you for your service

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago

Common lemmy.world L

[–] Etterra 134 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Jury nullification should not be a banned topic. It's perfectly legal and is the only direct way citizens can object to interpretations of the law. The very fact that the courts and government don't want people to know of it is a testament to its effectiveness in cases where the public will opposes the government in matters of law. Particularly when public opinion differs drastically from a strict interpretation of the law, but most especially when citizens find a law, its often limited proponents, or its execution to be objectionable, unconscionable, cruel, or unwilling to take circumstances into consideration. It's crucial for us to all understand our limited power over the government, especially when it's acting in an oppressive manner, violating human rights, ignoring the principle of justice in favor of a literal interpretation, or is otherwise objectionable by the majority of citizens as opposed to the minority of lawmakers.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] EndlessApollo 56 points 2 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 85 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I can understand (though not agree) with banning clear advocation for violence of CEOs, but the "I haven't had a reason to smile this much in a while" message that got the user banned was too far.

We will still consider suggestions of jury nullification for crimes that have not (yet) happened as advocation for violence

I see jury nullification as similar to self defense, just at a larger scale. I take this message as "You're not allowed to talk about defending yourself for future occasions, only ones that have already happened."
I guess talking about owning a gun for self defense can be seen as "advocating for violence" but that's a narrow minded view, where nullification is only used when the ethics are on the greater good, like thousands of deaths vs the one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 72 points 2 days ago (10 children)

Really? Jury nullification???

Glad I didn't join your instance because that is fucking insane.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 61 points 2 days ago (15 children)

Is your opinion that advocating for jury nullification would constitute some violation of Dutch, Finnish or German law based on legal advice?

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] FinishingDutch 109 points 2 days ago (3 children)

This shit is exhausting and incoherent to read. Also, jury nullification is in no way, shape or form β€˜advocating for violence’.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί