Disclaimer: Fuck the rich and please consider reading 1 paragraph before you go to comments to explain how I am a bootlicker. Thank you ٩(•͈ ꇴ •͈)و ̑̑❀

For context, I generally report all calls to violence, no matter who the “victim” is, whether they are a public figure or an anonymous user. I didn’t even register that the person I was “defending” was rich—I’m just aware that calls to violence are against most instances’ terms of service (due to legal threats). Genuinely sorry seahorse! I wish you just had something in your instance sidebar or even spoke to me instead of jumping to ban and “lib” insults!

Unverifiable information you will have to take my word for (per community rules)

Apologized to seahorse and got:

My own personal curiosities only adjacently related

Correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t this a bit of an abuse of federation? This is the same admin that pulled the move with the doxxing of Nick Fuentes. By banning users for reporting content that may violate our local instance rules, seahorse is making our local instances harder to moderate for our admins. (Honestly I respect the commitment to the running a very open and uncensored instance, but until Lemmy has the option to only report to local admins versus local & federated authorities, this may not be the best strategy?)

Anyway, this is pretty interesting. I’m honestly not too pressed about this (mostly I will miss !theonion@midwest.social) and curious what yall think. :)

  • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
    2·
    3 days ago

    Correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t this a bit of an abuse of federation? […] By banning users for reporting content that may violate our local instance rules, [other admins are] making our local instances harder to moderate for our admins. ([…] but until Lemmy has the option to only report to local admins versus local & federated authorities, this may not be the best strategy?)

    Idk if “abuse of federation” is the right term, but it’s definitely something. A more simplistic example might be things like different instances having different rules on what is and isn’t considered NSFW. If you local instance is more strict (lewd = NSFW) but the other instance more loose (nude = NSFW), then the other instance might view your reports as spam. I’m not entirely sure what a good approach is to this while maintaining a simple UX. My current understanding (which might be a little wrong, please correct me if I’m wrong and I’ll update the comment) is that reports get sent to three groups.

    1. The reported content’s community’s moderators.
    2. The reported content’s creator’s instance’s admins. This is the one I’m least sure about.
    3. The reporter’s instance’s admins.
    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOPEnglish
      1·
      3 days ago

      I share that understanding. Thanks for your response. I initially planned to include a similar NSFW example in my post but removed it to avoid distracting those already not reading and labeling me a bootlicker. 😅

      db0 (admin of this instance) has also agreed elsewhere in this thread that separate report buttons for different moderating groups are a good idea.

      Your phrasing, “Not abuse of federation but definitely something,” captures it well. It’s an unfortunate mix of imperfect UX and imperfect administration.