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.
Hm, interesting. Why not let them be and redirect people to communities like !AskUSA@discuss.online ?
Because if they're let be a lot of people won't migrate. If they're 502, 401, 404, or just broken (no connect) those stubborn people will be forced to pick a new home or give up on lemmy.
But LW is fine for most of the people. The fact that it took more than a year for this issue to emerge shows that.
And I'm definitely for more decentralization (I've been encouraging people looking for a US based instance to move to https://discuss.online ), wanting to shut down the biggest instance because they are following their local laws seems inappropriate.
If LW would actually shut down tomorrow, most of the people would probably think that Lemmy is indeed unstable as a platform, and leave it as a whole to go back to Reddit
They're not though, they're making excuses to make their restrictive policies seem more reasonable. They need to be made an example of for all the other fascists looking to get into fedi or host their own sites. Make examples out of services, don't just let someone have a business or site because it's theirs.
Those people who would go back to Reddit will do that already anyway, hell they probably already have. How many dead and inactive or barely active accounts are there here? Pulling the plug on instances who act pretentious sets the example for others looking to host their own services and if the people who never were committed choose to leave let them leave. They didn't want to be here in the first place.
Admin culture is rotten to the core, and we need people to cull these rotten pretentious admins or it'll get worse.
You seem pretty convinced, so no need to discuss further
๐