Hello World!
We’ve made some changes today, and we’d like to announce that our Code of Conduct is no longer in effect. We now have a new Terms of Service, in effect starting from today(October 19, 2023).
The “LAST REVISION DATE:” on the page also signifies when the page was last edited, and it is updated automatically. Details of specific edits may be viewed by following the “Page History” reference at the bottom of the page. All significant edits will also be announced to our users.
The new Terms of Service can be found at https://legal.lemmy.world/
In this post our community mods and users may express their questions, concerns, requests and issues regarding the Terms of Service, and content moderation in Lemmy.World. We hope to discuss and inform constructively and in good faith.
Lots of people think anarchy is what they want, until they get it.
no rules sounds pretty good, maybe there’s even an instance for it. but i guarantee that there will be a LOT of nazis and queerphobes. and that’s not why i am here.
Community is vital for anarchy to work. It’s hard to do that in an open online community tbh.
Not to put your point down, but to enritch it.
This phrase was said about ideologies like capitolism, communism, liberalism, conservitism, anarchism (like tou did) and likely more.
each time I pose a question, was the pure vision an evil one, or did it get twisted apon or after implementation
I argue that, in the specific problem space of Internet discussion communities, the absence of central guidance has been shown again and again to result in a race to the bottom.
That’s why computer networks have struggled with the problem for literally decades, since before http was a glimmer in the mind of Tim Berners-Lee. I well remember early USENET node providers claiming “completely uncensored” access to all newsgroups, only to find within 6 months or a year that they had to dramatically scale back on that promise by restricting the newsgroup list, or cancel certain customers, due to lawbreaking behavior. The problems of discussion forum moderation gave us Section 230, which grants immunity to site moderators for good-faith actions to restrict distribution of information which is “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable”.
Section 230 is pretty much an acknowledgment that without moderation, forums will almost inevitably descend into threats and harassment. And if you think that surely even a non-controversial forum could survive without moderation, look at what happened to Ravelry.
I miss the high technical bar to entry. Was great.
Having lived through the “Eternal September” beginnings, I’m sorry but you’ve got very strongly rose-tinted glasses on.
(Ref)USENET was a cesspool on the order of any modern *chan board or their ilk both before and after the Eternal September. Having a high technical bar to entry just meant most participants were obsessive lunatics with poor socialization (instead of merely half).
this comment smells like a windows irc client
A Windows IRC client … to access Lemmy?
That would be a high technical bar to entry!
Umm
Sure seems like a lazy way to dismiss the argument, just saying that he actually doesn’t know what he wants.
My detailed response