|
Top-level
 @Gargron If folk are reporting it, that's one way of telling you you've gotta have a rule, and asking you for help. You can also ban anyone you like at any time whether they've technically broken a rule or not; it's just a website, and mastodon is even more Just A Website because folk can pack up and move to another instance pretty easily, assuming they can find a non-Russian pro-Russia server. 4 comments
 @Gargron @ifixcoinops I have strong opinions about the situation in Eastern Europe (anti-Putin) and generally dislike apologism for that guy but I welcome a rules-based approach broadly speaking. If people get banned, it’s easier to ignore them if there was a citable reason to justify it. Which is to say I have never been a moderator but like what I think you’re trying to do.  @Gargron @ifixcoinops In the same way that the invasion forged on petty excuses has led to impose the martial law, you could use the announce feature to set some ad hoc rule of silencing propaganda accounts (maybe banning is overkill) for as long as the conflict goes, and work on a new draft of the CoC that addresses this in the meantime?  @Gargron @ifixcoinops That being said, most of my time online at knockout.chat, which is an active open source user-developed and user-run forum which formed after the original Facepunch Studios forums were deleted. Large, open discussions about the rules and moderation styles are commonplace there. |
Gregory's Server
@ifixcoinops Even if I technically have the right to ban anyone, it does not exactly foster trust if there is no consistency and it's not predictable. That's why I'd rather have clear rules.