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.
Everyone who opposes the assassination of one CEO is glorifying the thousands of murders he committed. It’s one or the other.
I’m a Canadian. I want Americans to have a proper health care system. I just don’t think a campaign of assassinations is going to get you there. I think it’s far more likely to backfire and turn the US into a Robocop-style dystopian hellscape where all the big companies have their own private armies working security and regular people aren’t even allowed into their city’s business district without going through security checkpoints.
Why not nationalize all of the health insurance companies, fire all the executives, and turn it all into a public health insurance agency?
Why not just have Russia end the war in Ukraine and Putin steps down and allows a real democracy to happen?
… Yeah, do you see the issue with your statements now?
Ukraine is working toward making that happen. They’re much closer to achieving it than they were 2 years ago.
And they definitely haven’t done so peacefully. So my point stands
They’re doing so lawfully.
I don’t think it’s legal for Russia to attack Ukraine, in Ukraine.
Also stop bullshitting, Ukraine is achieving peace and defending itself through missiles, bombs, and bullets, not lawyers.
It’s legal for Ukraine to defend itself from Russia.
But that other company already walked back the policy to not cover anaesthesia for the whole duration of surgeries.
And that’s great but honestly that’s still peanuts if your goal is to have a proper public health care system where no one has to go broke because they’re uninsured when they get sick.
Oh, Americans have given up on being that hopeful. Beggars can’t be choosers.
Are you against progress to a goal? We can’t just instantly change something as large as the medical industry overnight
I am for progress towards a goal.
None of the assassination advocates have laid out a concrete plan as to how assassinations will achieve their goals. All I’ve seen is:
No discussion at all of how this could backfire and lead to a dystopian hellscape, or how to avoid such a backfire. Things are very different from 1917. Technology is far more advanced and it’s not in the favour of citizens’ militias.
Uh…that’s not how it works at all. You should get past that logic in 5th or 6th grade.
Classic “angry teenager” argument. Not cool.
If you don’t support violence, then you support evil. That’s about as angsty tween as it gets.
Drag disagrees, but drag thought of a better and more fun argument anyway.
Imprisonment is a violent act. Anyone saying the police should imprison The Adjuster is advocating violence, and the admins should remove their comments.