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.

This is the Central Scrutinizer / It is my responsibility to enforce all the laws / That haven't been passed yet. / It is also my responsibility to alert each and every one of you / To the potential consequences / Of various ordinary everyday activities / You might be performing which could eventually lead to / The death penalty - or affect your parents' credit rating. / Our criminal institutions are full of little creeps like you / Who do wrong things…

A very weak response, and several days late. Not impressed.

tl;dr (if I am getting this right):

• Sometimes moderators don't get if something is forbidden under the TOS, or believe something should be forbidden but isn't. Ask an admin if uncertain.

• Moderators can further restrict content beyond the bare minimum of the TOS. Please don't complain to the admins if a moderator does this (in good faith, obviously).

• Conversely, moderators, please read the TOS and don't tell someone something is forbidden under it if it actually isn't.

• Previously, admins told mods to remove content re: Jury nullification when discussing violent crimes.

• Currently, this has been limited only to discussion of jury nullification of future violent crimes, as it could imply someone should actually perform said violent action because they would be acquitted via jury nullification. As far as I can tell, this is the only actual change of any rule in this post.

Summary over, personal thoughts follow: That one specific change, I don't actually have any issue with. Reasonable enough. Obviously the devil is in the details of what is forbidden under "advocating violence"; that is a monstrously complex discussion beyond the scope of this particular announcement. Furthermore, the value of some of the clarifications in this post are dependent on admins actually holding an open dialogue with users, the track record of which is... variable. (I am still waiting on a response from months ago, which I was then told would be available in a few weeks.)

Additionally, since lemmy.world remains federated with other instances which tolerate unpleasant behavior and I see no indication on this post that this will change, this functionally changes little of users' ability to access that content and contribute to it anyhow.

Everything was fine until the "Jury nullification" thing? Apparently that's an American thing where a state can disregard a federal law if they find it to be unconstitutional.
What does that have to do with Lemmy moderation?
I'm sorry if this is very obvious, but I'm not American, and just learned the meaning of the term from Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullification_(U.S._Constitution)

Huh, so hos instance has officially become garbage and it's time to dump it? Anyone have suggestions for a reasonable instance?

I’m gonna have to switch instances because of all the terrible shit the US does, free speech is the one thing we truly get right.

And I just want to let you know what free speech is when it comes to violence:

• yelling fire in a crowded theatre when there is none: not protected

• celebrating the death of a CEO who deserved it: protected (the deserved it is irrelevant to speech, but fuck that guy)

• saying you wish other unnamed CEOs will be killed next: protected unless there’s evidence of planning and ability to carry out murdering a specific CEO

• saying you wish a specific famous person be killed, such as Elon musk: grey area, depends on if there’s evidence of planning and ability to carry out. Public figures are a higher bar to reach than the lay people.

• saying you wish to kill your neighbor John who’s not famous: not protected regardless of planning or ability, it’s assault

• saying you want to kill any person and having evidence of planning and a method to do so: not protected

• saying you wish for a whole group to die: protected if there’s no evidence of planning and ability to carry it out. One could theoretically march around with signs that say death to fags and that’s totally legal. Example: Westboro Baptist Church picketing funerals with signs such as that.

Edit: also jury nullification is not violence. You’re going with the assumption that the assassin is guilty of a crime. Is it really a crime to murder a mass social murderer? Clearly us Americans aren’t too bent out of shape that this CEO is now resting in piss.

Edit 2: would it be murder to kill Hitler after he started gassing Jews? Is it not because Hitler had an ideology that Jews were subhuman and to be exterminated? What’s different about this CEO? Sure he didn’t target specific groups like Hitler did. But his ideology is money above all, and he didn’t care how many lives he took to make that money. Why is this any different? This is the industrialization of death. This is a genocide against undesirables. Hitler killed disabled people (and LGBTQ) first before moving onto the Jews. Most of America is just numbers on a spreadsheet and when we become too expensive and cut into profits too much we become socially murdered. It’s not a crime when the rich do it to us (for profit!!!!) but it’s a crime when we fight back? You Europeans are clueless!