This is a *chain of blocks*, specifically blocks for instances that federate with Mastodon instances, whether they are other Mastodon instances, or another kind of instance like GNUSocial, Pleroma, etc.
This is a brief, machine-readable version of my long and documented [human-readable version](http://telegra.ph/Instances-to-silencesuspend-on-Mastodon-06-23).
If you're new to this list and the kinds of instances that get blocked from Mastodon, I recommend you check the [human-readable one](http://telegra.ph/Instances-to-silencesuspend-on-Mastodon-06-23) for all these instances first just so you know what you're doing and who you're blocking. I also try to explain what the reasons are below too because this JSON blocklist is structured a bit differently.
I'm not much of a programmer so I don't have any scripts to offer you that can automatically apply blocks on your Mastodon instance from this JSON file, but I assume it would probably be kind of simple to perform.
- You want to keep illegal content (eg. child porn) off your servers.
- You want to promote healthy discussion and interactions between people that isn't poisoned by shitty, violent ideologies and dangerous conspiracy theories.
- You want your users to enjoy your instance and not have to worry about being harrassed or have shit flinged at them from people who don't know better.
- You want to defend the freedom of people to choose their pronouns, what religion they practice, how they want to represent themselves, who they want to fuck and to defend the right of these people to speak without fear of inane, hateful bullshit.
This blocklist isn't prescriptive too. Each instance has a list of reasons of why you might want to block an instance for and you can take the action that is most appropriate for your instance.
Don't know what a hate group is really like, or confused about which groups are hate groups? Don't worry! I've included links to many reputable resources that can help you understand in this readme.
Feel free to contribute either here or on Mastodon via [@blockchain@monsterpit.net](https://monsterpit.net/@blockchain).
Unless it's really obvious how bad an instance is by looking at their front page, it's important that you bring evidence. Links are especially preferred becuase it means I can verify, archive and screencap them myself.
I was accepting issues on this GitHub, but there were too many people who either didn't care about why they were blocklisted and just wanted to poison the atmosphere or who weren't willing to actually directly address why they were blocked in the first place and I don't really have the time or energy to deal with that.
I made [an FAQ](http://telegra.ph/MastodonOStatus-Instance-Blocking-FAQ-06-24) a while back that tries to address some of the common issues some people have with blocklists. It doesn't necessarily cover everything, but it might help.
Each instance has a URL and a list of reasons as to why they are on the blocklist. I'm not that much of a programmer, but I assume you can use those to filter which instances you want to block and how severe you want it to be.
These are the things that I personally have specific evidence of. These instances may be guilty of more things, but I'm only listing what I have to go by.
Non-prefixed tags mean that the administration actively embraces or engages in whatever the tag is. Prefixed tags represent that the content is still there, but the administration reacts to it in a more distanced way.
**Accepting.** The administration to my knowledge doesn't engage in, encourage, or endorse that behaviour themselves but they do accept it and enable it in some way by letting other users on their instance do it instead.
**Not Proactive.** The instance's administration is aware of the effects of certain kinds of behaviour on users in other instances and is willing to respond to requests from admins in other instances, but is not proactive in dealing with this themselves.
While that might seem okay (and it might be okay for you), not being proactive means that it still enables this stuff and it can routinely spill over anyway.
(And ultimately, the onus is then on other admins to react to this stuff, and report, etc. regarding stuff that isn't even in their instance.)
This an instance that either exists solely for corporate advertising, or is a typical multi-user instance that is enabling or has a clearly established plan to enable their instance to be used for corporate advertising.
The reason I don't separate different kinds of bigotry is because it's extra work for no real purpose. One of these is bad enough, and if you're the kind of person to go 'well, I don't like people being mean to gays but I do think we should put all muslims on some kind of watch list' then this list isn't for you.
Maybe `FVZ` and `bigotry` will eventually be merged since they're both bigoted and while `FVZ` people actively advocate for harmful consequences and casual bigotry doesn't necessarily, bigoted behaviour *still has harmful real-world consequences*.
`A-harassment` instances are instances whose administration have acted with complacency and not done anything when a user of theirs has engaged in harrassment.
This may not become a serious issue at the moment, but I think it could be a really important thing to keep an eye on for the future. I think that corporate ownership generally conflicts with the idea of social spaces as an emotionally supportive environment (how many of us left Twitter because it tolerates Nazis, doesn't have any real ethical or moral positions, and mines data?).
They also conflict with the idea of intermingling, spaces with a cooperative relationship to each other (ie. our instances) - corporations expect to dominate 'markets', we provide services based on what we can afford to those who want and need them. I would say that our kind of social networking is potentially an existential threat to corporate social networking, and we shouldn't let them have an inch because they will take a mile. If they ever take an interest in decentralised social networking, they will only care about us insofar that we're good PR for them.
I'm not necessarily saying block these right now, but I think keeping watch would be a good idea, especially if they become a thing in our particular language and geographical spheres. They currently only seem to be a thing in Japan right now.
The instances with this tag usually claim to be defenders of free speech by limiting moderation, but really, these words are just a front. They are in fact safe spaces for hate groups and fascist and violent ideologies, including:
- Male Supremacy (often referred to as The Manosphere) [[link 1]](https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/male-supremacy) [[link 2]](http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/2017/10/24/hope-not-hate-explains-manosphere/)
The reason they are all in one category is similar to why bigotry is one larger group - it functionally makes sense. It also especially makes sense here because the borders between each group are very fuzzy (they have great ideological similarities), organisations in these areas tend to be tightly related and connected to each other and one particular group is often a gateway to another.
Not even this categorisation is entirely neat - White Supremacy usually necessitates some kind of Male Supremacy and anti-LGBT (and probably even more).
Not all of these instances necessarily have all of these things, and not all of these instances are completely comprised of these people, but this shit is still ultimately toxic and not what you should be allowing if you want to make your instance safe and pleasant for people who aren't violent and have reasonable things to say.
Other people charitably call this kind of thing 'channer culture' or call it by the way *these groups* frame it, which is ""free-speech zone"". I'd rather not label them on their own terms, especially when it's not accurate, and when they don't really care about free speech of certain people. It's one thing to say ideas, and it's another thing to weaponise social channels against certain groups by harassment and misinformation, which is what these groups are famous for.
To give these people the grace of letting them call themselves free speech advocates is discrediting the very nature of free speech. We can do much better. Blocking who are at best a bunch of harrassing pseudointellectuals and conspiracy theorists and at worst, really malicious entities will actually enable our communities to have more productive and open debates.
I want healthy dialogue and debates and I want to see more of it, which is one of the reasons why they are blocked. Moderation is essential to healthy debates and dialogue, and these kinds of people have proven, not just by virtue of the things they believe, but the way they act that they are anathema to honest, rational, reasonable debate.
Whether the administration agrees with these people or not, if they have them with their instance, they are facilitating them in some way. **When speech carries consequences, you cannot claim to be neutral.** Same goes for people who share the instance with them. You are responsible for who you associate with.
`NP-FVZ` instances may have at least some awareness of the impact some of this content might have on other users and will try to mitigate that when another instance's admin makes a report, but only when a report occurs.
[Check out my human-readable blocklist](http://telegra.ph/Instances-to-silencesuspend-on-Mastodon-06-23) for the summary on them. They are *pretty bad*.
While 'Lolicon' proper refers to a particular subset of illustrated child porn. Westerners on the internet often use it to generally mean **illustrated sexualised imagery involving what appear to be minors**, and I'm gonna use it that way because it's a really convenient label for a tag.
This instance compromises *it's own users' privacy* (not others in the fediverse) in some way, like by adding Google Analytics to track their behaviour.
Used to refer to hiveway.net currently, who have broken Mastodon's license and acted in a generally shitty way by basically making a fork of Mastodon with the serial numbers filed off and a new coat of paint.
Not the best tag, but tags aren't the best at nuance.
