The NVO-topic went from NVO to a lot of talk about moderation and the forum.
The whole safenet project is about a decentralized internet and we all know that it means freedom of speech more than anything else. But on your own platform you censor when you don’t like someone. What does it say about this project?
People who own the domain can choose to have community moderation. We choose to be here. I think it’s great. If you conduct yourself like a proper human being you can have any opinion you want here. It’s when people slander others or try to extort others or things get too personal that it doesn’t add to the discussion, hence moderation.
Even with free speech you have a right to not listen. As a community the agreement is to not listen to some folk. They can and do post in many places. It is a quandary though and a pity you cannot just mute somebody in your own account etc.
I suspect in SAFE the ability to mute/block individuals by individuals will happen. Right now though we have centralised managed services, hopefully not for too long. In terms of what it says about this project then I think keeping posts but stopping nonsense does make a lot of sense at times, but it’s also a very hot debate for sure.
On the SAFE network, anyone will be able to create their own forums that they can moderate however they decide to. This is necessary to maintain high quality discussion.
The difference is that on SAFE, you could do something that governments don’t like, and they couldn’t shut it down, whereas this entire forum could be shut down if authorities decided that should happen.
So, you’re saying that you won’t interfere unless it is really necessary. Yes, everyone has his right to choose to be here, but all of us heard this story so many times “we won’t interfere unless it’s really necessary” - it always ends the same. Either it’s moderated or it’s not. There is nothing in between.
It will be great that the governments won’t be able to shut it down, but if they ask you to moderate it, are you brave enough to say no?
Creating a door into something, means it will be used. Just by leaving a possibility for corruption, you will be bringing the corruption.
I’m here everyday and I’m not a mod. Nemgun was banned but his posts remain for others to see, as an example of his poor character. That seems exactly down the middle to me. He was just harassing people who provide value here and others who are here to learn (like me). It’s just unnecessary noise. I don’t know about you but if I hear stactic on the radio I appreciate when the dial is tuned to something that isn’t just noise.
No rulers does not mean no rules. It just means that a centralised group does not get to define them.
If governments know who moderators are, they could try to force them to censor something, but it would be so easy for a duplicate new forum to appear with moderators in another country for example, or for the compromised moderator to lose their moderator credentials.
Good quality moderation isn’t corruption, and can counter corruption such as spamming and trolling.
Saying this, for anyone who feels unmoderated discussion will be useful, there’ll be nothing stopping that happening. This doesn’t make it the right choice for this community, which could easily be damaged / distracted by spam & trolls.
I think this is the main point. To each his own, but certain types of posts are not wanted here by this community. If someone feel it’s a good idea to post what we consider to be junk, feel free to post it elsewhere, be it on the Internet or on Safenet. Just don’t post it here for us.
@Al_Kafir and whoever else might be wondering.
I think “we” is whoever likes it here enough to stick around and follow the rules of the moderators. I sort of disagree with them about banning nemgun despite his language. But I like it here enough to stay anyway. If I don’t like it anymore I can leave and set up a forum of my own. If the moderators here decide they don’t like me, they can ban me. Fair play. I was banned from the NVO Slack twice and my posts linking to this forum were removed. I think their moderators are ridiculous and show very bad judgment, but I don’t feel offended or “censored” in any way that could really hurt me. It’s their forum. I just won’t be buying anything any of those people try to sell anywhere ever again. To each his own.
We banned both @nemgun and @Marto_Bragui (last account this week) as we’re quite sure (after doing research on the registration IPs) that they’re the same person. So combination of language, making physical threats and using a sock puppet account caused a ban.
Sorry but you are factually mistaken here. This forum does indeed have a centralised group of rulers that do define and write all the rules. An unelected small group choose how/who runs the forum.
“no rulers” would imply that everyone had an equal say about how rules are established and who staffs the forum. Because of this, I believe the description of “community run” is a misnomer and it would be more correctly described as “privately run”.
I replied to you to factually correct something but my post was removed/censored…as is often the case, without any explanation to anybody.
All I said was that this forum is indeed run by a centralised group who do define all the rules. Stating this is likely to get you perma-banned as it appears to be a censored subject.
Probably my last post.
Sorry but how have you established what this community wants?
Who’s the “We”? Do you mean those running the forum or the larger community? Only the former can remove posts etc.
I’m not really following the logic here, somehow it has been decided to leave all the abusive posts from NVO here, at the same time as banning them from posting anything else, yet keeping lines of communication open between NVO and the forum operators - why?
Nobody else gets this special treatment, quite the opposite in fact.
I mixed up several replies during the move so some of them are out of order from a time perspective. Can’t get them back at the moment.
I wasn’t talking about this forum. I was talking about what safe net would be capable of delivering (e.g. Decorum).