 Personally I find 'blocking an instance because they won't block /any/ other instance' big bullshit :nkoFacepalm: First of all, you don't get to dictate the rules on any others instance to begin with and secondly why should you be bothered by this? If you block that /any/ instance it's done and you won't see stuff for it anymore but stop shaming others for not making the same decision, that's very childish "I block you because you won't block them" <-- ignore that bullshit please 98 comments
The tag #FediBlock is a SUGGESTION not a RULE! Check it out for yourself and decide but stop forcing other people to follow your crap @stux@mstdn.social I'd also like to add that it can hurt your users because it cuts off their own ability to moderate and follow who they feel comfortable with. There are other options outside of blocking.
[DATA EXPUNGED]
@stux I'm blocking you because you don't block instances that block instances that don't block other instances!  @stux@mstdn.social i deny and replace it with my own: i got zero blocks, though im blocked for eg being edgelord. lol @drq @stux there's a lot of instances that are worth blocking, that have been around for a long time. I wouldn't want them to be able to interact with me by default. And I think a lot of people would agree with that as a baseline. And I don't want to be on, and would not encourage people to be on, an instance that allowed anyone to interact with you. But blocking an instance solely because you wouldn't want to be there, that doesn't make sense to me. tl;dr Stux mods good and I support @stux Thank you for stating this and giving us a sensible platform. I left Twitter back in 2017 because I repeatedly experienced the cult of "block them or you can't be my friend," so naturally I have zero tolerance for cult-like and childish behavior. Although I'm reluctant to speak for others, I'm probably echoing shared sentiment when I say... we don't want Masto to be another Twitter. Thanks Stux. @sugarcheri @stux I know I'm going to regret jumping into this thread, but trying to encourage people to block the Nazis any way we can is exactly how many of us are trying to keep the Fediverse from becoming Twitter. @tw @stux With respect... imo there's a stark difference between calling out a Nazi account -- which I agree, should be done -- and outright telling people who to block. If you call out the account/instance, others can see for themselves why they may choose to block that person/instance. I block relentlessly, mostly for personal reasons, and I never make a "thing" about it. It's just a personal mantra -- I do my best to refrain from dragging others into my bad experience. @sugarcheri I don't know precisely what @stux is subtooting in this thread, if anything, but sure, I agree that Fediblock is, in fact, a recommendation, not a mandate. The subtext I read is that Stux is getting pressure from someone to block some bad actor, or this third party will block mstdn.social. I understand the unhappiness about this, and that this third party may be communicating it poorly, but ultimately, just like Stux' position, it's their right to take their position. @tw @sugarcheri Basically we handle a 'simple policy' on that part; if content is dangerous/harmful or illegal we block and remove it but when 'we don't like' an instance admin or isntance for example it's up the the users themselfs As long as it's not harmful, thats the most important. People should be safe on there and also make decision in a safe area @sugarcheri @stux (I also mostly don't agree with "threaten to or block an instance just for them not blocking one other instance" - but there is an argument for "this instance explicitly never blocks anyone" being a red flag, as is "this instance knowingly/actively interacts a lot with bad actors and refuses to block them". But it's definitely more complicated / nuanced than "your blocklist must match mine" IMO.) @tw @stux Tim, you nailed it imo. The "your block list must match mine" is authoritarian and cult-like behavior. If someone is openly posting Nazi-sympathizing content then it would be great for us to be made aware of it so we can choose to block (or not). However -- barring extreme circumstances -- ultimately who we block needs to remain a personal choice, or we risk becoming what we believe to be fighting against 💕 @tw @stux Yes, I kinda get the same impression after reading your reply now. Good point. I'm sure Stux and other mods have more to deal with than most of us even realize. Btw I think I feel like you -- Fediblock is a terrific tool but even a good tool can be abused. If we all blocked everyone that was posted on Fediblock, none of us would be having any conversations at all! That said, Mstdn.social is a pretty large instance. I should think any mod who dares to block it will find that backfires.  @sugarcheri @tw @stux Every good & useful tool can be abused & manipulated by people with evil intentions. That's just a given. We can help keep each other safe by giving heads up to our own networks on problematic & abusive folks. @sugarcheri @tw There are really some /bad shit/ instances out there, trust me :blobcatgiggle: these days i know the url from my head but as a first time admin i think they should check just the timeline before blocking, for example it could just be one or two users instead of an admin doing the 'dirty work' :ablobwink: @stux @tw I'm sorry you're going thru this. Have mods/admins considered creating an instance for just mods/admins to join, so that first time admins can ask questions, learn, etc. A community where they can learn the ropes of being an admin? Maybe this a stupid idea. Tbh, I know nothing about running a server. I just tend to search out the most reasonable, diplomatic and proactive solution 🤷♀️ Anyone who's cowardly enough to order me to block people THEY don't like is someone I can live without.  @tw @stux I have seen various things over the last couple of years I use the fediverse, both Mastodon and other services. The thing that bothers me A LOT, is when some instances are being blocked because of the software they use. I have seen that quite a few times, especially with Pleroma (or any of its forks), for various reasons. From the bad actors who use it to controversial things some of its developers have said. @stux I wonder if the behaviour is from before authorised fetch became a common part of the fedi, mainly as i have head the reason for it is to prevent toots from vunrible users on other instances getting to bad instances
@stux I saw a post from someone recently asking where he can find blocklists for his newly created instance. He was prepared to accept blocklists from others without knowing why the instances had been blocked. My own view is create blocklists based on your own experience @danny@strangeminds.social @stux@mstdn.social I'd say that you could look at the list and then go verify whether or they should be blocked yourself. That the suggestion still holds, but you've vetted it yourself. I'm certainly not a fan of blocklists but if people were willing to vet and verify them before they added them I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it. the list is with the reason why so if the "community" states, "fascist's, totalitarian, nazi's" plus any amount of bull shit bingo you see fit you add and adopt. Point in any case is that it should be some format you can upload instead of doing that work by individual instance per instance input.  @stux I appreciate your approach to moderation and I’m happy I accidentally landed here. Glad to be a patreon too! @stux@mstdn.social it's about protecting their community. it's not about dictating server rules. for example: if someone blocked me because i was harassing one of their people, but you didn't block me ... then anyone on your server who followed me would give a route to the space where i was blocked to continue that harassment. and yes there are seriously some dudes out there dedicated to harassing and harming others that they will look for ways around a block just to make someone else's life hell. @stux@mstdn.social i always forget but i sometimes have to remind myself DO THESE PEOPLE NOT HAVE A BRAIN  @stux that's a good point. In some cases I could understand, but yes, I feel like it should be up to the admins. @calculsoberic But more in the way like: "check before block" :blobcatgiggle: (I hope you also do before blocking on here 😇) @stux There are situations where a missing block on another instance can actually be a problem: https://wirebird.com/artiblocks/defining-secondhand-smoke It's not a super common scenario, though, I'd think. For my part I would be very very suspicious of a site that didn't block, say, truth.social--but it wouldn't be immediate grounds for defederation, just caution. @kaliranya This would be a rare case indeed but yes! I have consider this but deemed not 'woth it' 😉 It just happens not that often for blocking 'second hands' :blobcatgiggle:  @stux @kaliranya i think fairspeech enabling authorized fetch should be able to address that
on an individual level it still baffles me why mastodon still doesn't have pleroma-style "mute conversation" options @stux this sounds fundamentally the same as cancel culture: “we all have to stop supporting <person> because <reason> and if you don’t you’re a bad person”   @stux agree. Instance level blocks should be used only in extreme cases such as for legal reasons or for safety of the greater fediverse community. I hated the thought of blocking an instance as an individual user but doing so as admin one would think would be a more difficult decision.  @Sh4d0w_H34rt @stux I strongly agree with Stux here, but instance blocking is particularly valuable for :obvious cases:. There are a lot of servers that are both run by and full of extremely awful people. Fediblock is useful because it can give a "heads up" that might be the case, but yeah, people have taken it to excess too at times. Just because you don't like something the admin said or did doesn't mean you should block the whole server. @ocdtrekkie @stux true. There are issues like doxxing a common tactic used to intimidate or target people which may or may not be legal. What would be best if the instance has no rules against it and wouldn't change them? Should that be on the individual users or would this be FediBlock scenario? @Sh4d0w_H34rt @stux I mean, I would go by what you see in practice, not the defined rules. The server admin can block individual users from interacting with their server too, if that's enough to solve the issue. I feel like instance blocking is a statement that everyone on that server is awful. There are servers where that's the case, but many where the communities are more mixed. I think instance blocking should always be considered case-by-case. @ocdtrekkie @stux a little while ago a user I was following doxxed someone so I reported the post and blocked the user then not long after another user of the same instance did so again. When I reached out to the instance admin they said that doxxing would not be restricted but I could request its removal. I blocked the instance the next day. @Sh4d0w_H34rt @stux How big was the instance? Is what you were dealing with a single problematic person evading your block, or an overarching issue with the community of the server? I mean, almost anyone can evade any block on the fediverse by signing up on any number of servers. I'm not really trying to judge your call, I don't know the details, but it's one of those things that I think should just be applied thoughtfully. @ocdtrekkie its a fairly large instance with very lax rules and for legal reasons I don't want to get caught up in something started from there, will miss a few accounts but it was worth it. @Sh4d0w_H34rt @stux at that point, you're blocking the instance not only for yourself, but you're making that decision for all of your users as well.
 @MxAlba@todon.nl @stux@mstdn.social but none reason is good for trying to force others to block someone. @stux Let users manage blocks/domain blocks, and keep the instance level block for instances which are like...actually harmful, thx.   I don't have the chops to explore it formally, but one wonders if the logic of blocking instances might lead to an all-island situation, no network, axiomatically. If people become sufficiently discerning, to employ an anodyne term. Granting there are borders beyond which we'd find broad agreement that a block is indicated.  51 users, no server blocks, and no abuse reports, no mod overhead.
My secret: I talk just enough shit to get my server blocked by the really unstable instances and it keeps the drama away 😎 @stux One excuse they try to use is that this can make your posts federate to the blocked instance, but Mastodon, Akkoma, and Misskey can all turn on secure fetch to avoid that
It really is just an excuse to be authoritarian tbh  @stux if they spend a large amount of time apologizing for the Nazi/terf instance and saying I should unblock it, they get uncomfortably close to seeming like okay with Nazis. Or they just take up so much time they need to be muted. However, discussing blocks is fine, as is having two servers make their own choices for their users. For example events in two cities might share ban lists, and based on the report from the other event, agree to ban a mischief maker from both. @stux Agree 100% with you! Some instances seem to get off on blocking other instances for seriously questionable reasons.  @stux It would be the end of the fediverse if "blocking because you don't block" is applied universally. I will not do it. I prefer silencing, it means crap doesn't leak into timelines if you're not looking for it. But blocking is making an absolute decision for all the people on my server, and I think it it up to them who they follow, they are grown-ups and can make their own decisions.  @stux I feel the same way. I only block #Fediverse instances if: 👉🏾 They are engaging in explicit illegal content (which will be followed up with a report to the proper authorities) 👉🏾 If users from that instance engage in harassment against me en mass (I do not have time to block hundreds of accounts all day) 👉🏾 If the instance is attempting to sabotage other instances (example: DDoS attacks). Aside from that I will just block accounts if they are problematic. agreed,   @stux While that in and of itself is a bad policy, chances are those instances also have poor hate speech moderation on themselves. I am not sure about the exact way how my server handles this, but I would expect that places that dont block outright nazi shit are not welcome any more. Thats not childish, that is reacting as it is supposed to be.  Exactly! Who I block is my business. If you want to block me for whatever reason, you have the right. But no one is going to coerce/demand of me that I block anyone. You do you, and I'll do me. |
Gregory's Server
And don't be proud of being a sheep btw, it's not plus but a big minues
Think for youself, don't be a sheep