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.
Personally tired of hearing about it. I disagree on the morality of this and made an acct on another instance. Can do same with communities on lemmy.world if we could all agree to move to them.
That option was never off the table. It would make it easier for those of us who prefer justice over murder to block the community of those who want society to devolve into chaos and anarchy. Those who call for violence and some half assed revolution. I don’t need you here.
I’m tired of hearing people espouse their basest thoughts only to come up with murder is justified. It took you two seconds to come up with that? What happens next? When the tribe has devolved to a point where even they could be the target who will be there to say maybe we went too far. Well the line was passed miles ago and you didn’t even realize you crossed it.
All this has taught me is that we have a severe morality and ethics problem. It probably happened about a generation ago. I wonder what stopped being instilled or taught (or who did the teaching) to cause this devolution. That’s what I’m worried about right now.
Oh, NOW we’re worried about a slippery slope?
I would have thought that point would be the time a classroom of elementary school students got shot up. (Not that time, the other time.)
B-b-B-b-B-ut…!
OK, boomer.
Historically we know exactly what happens next. You more than likely wouldn’t be here at all if historically class wars didn’t happen. You either lack the context and understanding to empathize with millions of people who died because this man felt the need to enrich himself and the shareholders of the company at the extreme detriment to the rest of society, or you’re deliberately ignoring facts to suit a personal belief and opinion.
I have often been told by people who think their politics is more important than my mental health that I don’t have to interact with political posts and I can just ignore them. I’m not going to say that to you because I don’t think it’s fair to you. But keyword blocking on the other hand is a thing and if this detrimentally affects your mental health then you should take the necessary steps to protect it.
I find it interesting that you seem to think people who think he got a measured response and outcome to the way he lived should leave though.
It’s an interesting combination, too. In very devolved industrial countries like the US, people are both more readily violent and the rich have successfully told the poor that the very poor are a big part of their problem.