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.
This seems like a double standard: Should any defense of the US healthcare system also be banned because it barbarically leads patients to die waiting for care in an intentional way?
There is genuinely only 1 thing that matters. People are desperate for change, while Democrats are viciously protecting the status quo, and Republicans are actively making it worse, and enriching themselves. Healthcare, inflation, over charging for milk, literally everything down to the fact they can’t even time stop lights well enough to curb traffic jams so cars break down faster and you pay more to fix it. I do not envy your position being forced to exist by their laws. The day is coming when sides will be required to be chosen. Probably by them. How many ip’s have you already turned over? Keep this in mind. They are the ones that get eaten, no matter how powerful they may posture to be now. They are weak without the people they are enslaving, and the people they need to maintain control are starting to starve.
Wow what a crock of shit
Does anyone know of a “(US) free speech instance”?
“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.” Ok that is utter bullshit regardless of country, and I’m no American saying that. You though, whoever wrote that, have completely revealed yourself as an utter statist monkey begging to be dominated
Aight, guess I’ll start looking for a better instance
Woah, I get not allowing advocating for violence, but restricting people from discussing the topic of jury nullification is pretty messed up regardless of how you feel about the killing.
-
If Jury Nullification is legal and allowed, then frankly covering that exact thing up is an abomination and y’all should be utterly ashamed of yourselves. Since when is Lemmy in the habit of backing an establishment while not allowing people involved to know the full picture? Genuinely shameful and disgusting behavior.
-
Yeah, I’m not going to ever remove anything from my communities relating to that or to the violence against the CEO. There is no difference between Brian Thompson and any other mass murderer on the planet. Are you asking me to protect Hitler or Pol Pot as well from criticisim and glee over their death? No? Then I am sure as fuck not going to do it for this guy.
-
So is the manifesto allowed to be posted on
.world?Lol we left reddit for this? Now this is quite an unexpected nullification of jury duties of internet mods. I reject your reality and inject my own ya buncha bozos.
At what point is supporting the prosecution of this assassin advocating for violence? The social murder done by the CEO is so many orders of magnitude greater, and the state will do violence to the killer to defend the industry’s right to do social violence.
Nobody was having this conversation when people rightly cheered the deposing of Assad. Guess what? That involved violence, a lot of it. That was state-backed violence too though, so I guess we’re all just fine with it.
The state calls its own violence “law” and that of the people “crime”.
I guess lemmy.world is happy to just go along with whatever the state wants. It’s just insulting that you pretend it’s about “violence” and you expect people to believe you.
How do I change instances? I think I’m on this one and I want off.
Broseph, I can’t have sympathy. The income inequality won’t let me. People aren’t cheering the unaliving necessarily, but the fact that one of these people actually answered for their crimes, in whatever form that took. Because courts weren’t gonna make him.
No no, I’m cheering the killing.
As somebody who has been browsing the news section at another major social media (you probably know which one), I can assure you they were celebrating what happened to that CEO. it is primarily the reason I just signed up here.
What happened to the CEO was wrong. Full stop.
What the CEO did was wrong. Full stop.
What happened to him was justice and self defense. Full stop.
I see what you’re saying, but you’re wrong
Says who? Why is it legal for a man to have power over the lives of millions and used an AI algorithm to further deny necessary Healthcare to millions and then use the defense of the law book to justify that. Law is what we as a society deemed necessary to preserve the society. Once law was dictated by corporate interests with no incentive to preserve society, not adhere to the needs of anyone in the society, then society will deem the laws no longer apply.
You’re wrong. You don’t see what he’s saying. Because you’re still abiding by a system designed to prosecute you and protect corporate interests. US has warred against leaders with smaller body counts than many of our CEO’s, with their life ending decisions. Don’t be fooled. They just have extra steps ™ to their mass murder cases. They hide behind the social courtesy of a system that they designed. So get over the propaganda you’ve been taught in public school, unveil the crumbling structure of our legal system, breathe the fresh air and join the people’s outrage against the corporate class who has already deemed you and millions of others expendable, a rounding error, a statistic.
You know you are wrong. It was inexcusable.
Woops. You’ve convinced me. I’m wrong. Carry on
I hope you think it over.
Who made a death threat here?
Lame. Jury nullification is good and necessary in this case. Saving people’s lives shouldn’t get you punished, regardless of your motives.
If someone killed Putin so that 2000 people don’t have to die every day to achieve his political/financial objectives, I’d thank them.
It’s always the masses expected to endure death and suffering, while those who do the killing enjoy all the customs and protections of civilized society. It’s completely backwards.
All the CEOs going into overtime panicking: just don’t kill people. Eye for an eye is a universally shared emotion. Always has since biblical times, always will be. This isn’t about being a prick about API costs (Reddit). Playing games with people’s lives is an extreme circumstance that we’ve somehow grown accustomed to tolerating in this country. People are waking up to that travesty. Let them.
