The Lemmy.World Terms of Service now in effect
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We've made some changes today, and we'd like to announce that our Code of Conduct is no longer in effect.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.
That thread filled with people who got banned from Lemmy World. You think everyone there is arguing in good faith?
And some of the reactions to the new ToS have been quite aggressive towards the admin team, even though there is nothing there that changed how people can use our site. Be a decent person and you are welcome, that is the document's purpose.
We had reactions telling us "fuck off corporate shills" and "suck my balls" and publicly stating they will be a problem and then it's Shocked Pikachu when they get banned and start threads everywhere.
As you pointed out, people who sign up on Lemmy World have to agree to these terms by typing "I agree" in the sign-up form. We're looking into other options for existing users.
Part of what you are saying may be true, but what the OP is claiming definitely isn't. The Internet Wayback Machine links to the "offending" comment, which they couldn't have manipulated, and the modlog reason on lemmy.world isn't lying. Worse, it was a comment in this thread where "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." that got him banned with the claim that he was "disagreeing with the Terms of Service" because of it, and it does not seem that any apology or acknowledgement has been sent.
Speaking of which, you can go through OP's history in their kbin.social account and find out how he was defending your admin team from the reactions you are complaining about until he had his comment history completely deleted and his account banned on lemmy.world.
The problem isn't just with existing users, the problem is with new and existing users from other Lemmy instances who aren't going to have the same Terms of Service as you. You are basically going to have to come up with a way to get them to agree with it before they can participate in it, and given that this server seems to be within the EU, that probably also means some additional GDPR concerns when obtaining if you are trying to cover yourselves legally.
Your account is brand new, which of the banned users are you?
What do you mean? Are you suggesting new users from other servers should explicitly be asked that question? It seems like just confirming their freely given consent and acceptance of the Terms of Service would cover it. Otherwise, it just seems like you are trying to derail the intent of this community to fish for excuses.
Just pointing out that you signed up on one instance to complain about the TOS and bans of another one. And that was your first and only action. Pretty sus but I am sure you have no stakes in this
"Derail the intent of this community", what?
I signed up to use Lemmy. It's federated. I'm also free to sign up in multiple instances as well, just as I'm free to choose to sign up with a new account to discuss something that concerns me, specially when it involves getting entire accounts purged and banned for reasons that don't seem clear and for which there is evidence that it isn't just someone with a beef. Are you implying alts should be illegal?
I'm sure the admins share the same concerns as you, and will perform and act as they consider appropriate. It is absolutely none of your concern and your suspicions mean nothing, not to mention you seem to have difficulty reading the bar on the side.
I don't know...
"It is absolutely none of your concern and your suspicions mean nothing..." is a blatantly false statement. That is a community member, he has as much right to express his thoughts about the conversation as you do.
I suppose in a way you are right, as I can't really speak for anyone else's concern, but his comments are complete speculation that attempt to attack the character and not the argument of the conversation, also derailing it. There's no way for him to prove his claims, and it just acts to imply that someone could have been banned so their thoughts don't matter.
Imagine someone banned my account for these comments, would they cease to be relevant? Would they cease to be relevant if I brought my thoughts up on an alt? I guess you could question the motive, specially if the conversation was toxic, but have my questions and concerns been toxic? So even if it became applicable, would his doubts be relevant?
Unfortunately, credibility does need to be earned, ideas do not exist in a vacuum, nor should they. This is a necessary adaptation to the quantity of information presented to us in the modern day, every day. This is why pure rhetoric and rationality cannot be used to understand the world around us, it's simply impractical to do that much processing every day.
Calling a person's credibility into question is thus very valid, as it implies debate is not being entered into in good faith. If you wish this resolved, you will have to earn your right to be listened to by anyone who has any significant amount of experience with online communities. It's just too easy to spout fancy sounding bullshit like some kind of firehose, manufacture evidence in a variety of ways, and just generally waste people's time. It happens all the time.
Far enough, but that just goes back to the original problem that the OP ran up against. If they had earned that credibility, if they had built up months of history of comments that proved it, what would it matter if they could be purged instantly? If I linked my main alt, and it got a purge and a ban because someone on the admin team doesn't like me bringing this up, then I would lose all the credibility I had, if I didn't back it up in the Internet Wayback Machine like the kbin.social OP did.
So I understand why you might question my credibility, but at the same time, you seem to be bolstering the merit of discussing the issue.
You ban people for disagreeing with you no matter if they're in good faith or bad. I'm going to assume everyone you banned is in good faith until proven otherwise due to your track record.