UnionRoom
/
dzuk-blockchain
mirror of https://github.com/dzuk-mutant/blockchain
1
0
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity
dzuk-blockchain/info/reasons.md

9.3 KiB
Raw Blame History

Reasons

Reasons as to why you might want to block an instance are provided in the form of reasons tags in the JSON.

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.

You can use reason tags to filter which instance you want to block and how badly you want to do it.

prefixes

Some of these tags have prefixes to indicate variations in the way that an instance's administration treats the particular issue.

Unprefixed

This means that the administration actively embraces or engages in whatever the tag is.

A-

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.

tags

advertising

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.

There's a difference between personal and community announcements and corporate advertising. This is for the latter, not the former.

corporate

Corporate-owned space. Clearly, your use of this tag will depend on what you think about corporations. I understand this isn't for everyone.

(Following text mostly copy-pasted from the human-readable list)

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.

dct

Dangerous Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy theories can be a complicated subject, and I don't mind some degree of speculative stuff, because it's harmless or can potentially be true but generally what crosses the line for me generally comes under one (or multiple) of these:

  • It promotes psuedoscience
  • Is is a hate group conspiracy theory (ie. 'International Jewry', Cultural Marxism, Holocaust Denial)
  • It is one that necessitates or involves hatred (ie. racism, bigotry, etc...)
  • It generally gets people hurt or fuels violence

harrassment

Unprefixed

The administration has engaged in, encouraged or endorsed harrassment, whether within OStatus/ActivityPub protocols, or elsewhere.

A- prefix

Instances whose administration have acted with complacency and not done anything when a user of theirs has engaged in harrassment.

hate-speech

Here are some examples! Take your pick:

General hate

  • racism / racialism
  • homophobia
  • anti-LGBTQ+++ [link]
  • TERFs / fake goths [link]
  • anti-muslim bigotry [link]
  • ... probably way more!

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.

Internet hate/harassment ideologies

Other people charitably call a lot of this kind of thing on the internet '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 on this list. 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.

Edgy Bullshit

If the way someone talks is indistinguishable from people with hateful ideologies, it's their problem to clear up their act. (Of course, someone could also just be doing this so they don't have to genuinely say what they believe, god forbid.)



Unprefixed

The instances with this tag usually claim to be defenders of free speech by limiting moderation, but really, these words are just a front. It's really just about certain kinds of free speech at the expense of other peoples' free speech.

A- prefix

This means that as far as I can tell, the administration doesn't engage in this or agree with the people on the instance that do it, but they facilitate it nonetheless by letting that person stay on their server.

When speech carries consequences, you cannot claim to be neutral. You are responsible for who you associate with.

jingoism

Oxford Dictionary:

extreme patriotism, especially in the form of aggressive or warlike foreign policy

For the lack of a better term. This refers to just one instance right now, Counter.Social.

Check out my human-readable blocklist for the summary on them. They are pretty bad.

lolicon

Sexualised depictions of minors.

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.

privacy

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.

spam

The administration enables spam accounts.

tech-sleaze

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.

untagged-NSFW

It is what it is really.

unresponsive

Administration doesn't appear to be responsive to moderation messages.