@ernest how do I report a Magazin on kbin.social ? There is a usere called “ps” who is posting to his own “antiwoke” Magazin on kbin.social. Please remove this and dont give them a chance to etablish them self on kbin.social. When I report his stuff it will go to him because he is the moderator of the magazin? Seems like a problem. Screenshot of the “antiwoke” Magazin /sub on kbin.social. 4 Headlines are visible, 2 exampels: “Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society” “How to end wokeness” #Moderation #kbin #kbin.social 📎

edit: dont feed the troll, im shure ernest will delet them all when he sees this. report and move on.

Edit 2 : Ernest responded:
“I just need a little more time. There will likely be a technical break announced tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Along with the migration to new servers, we will be introducing new moderation tools that I am currently working on and testing (I had it planned for a bit later in my roadmap). Then, I will address your reports and handle them very seriously. I try my best to delete sensitive content, but with the current workload and ongoing relocation, it takes a lot of time. I am being extra cautious now. The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly. For now, please make use of the option to block the magazine/author.”

  • KTVX94
    link
    fedilink
    41
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I joined kbin recently and I’m kind of concerned about the implications of this. I don’t support those posts at all, but who gets to say what’s worth banning and what not? Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site? Or is it the specific instance that magazine is on that has the authority to ban what’s inside? How does all of this work?

    Edit: my bad, I got kbin and kbin.social mixed up. Noob mistake.

    • Kierunkowy74
      link
      fedilink
      491 year ago

      kbin.social administration controls only what is published on kbin.social, and what content from elsewhere kbin.social users can see. An user banned from kbin.social can make another account, on another site and start recreate there his banned community. kbin.social will be able to ban this remote user and remote community, but this restricts only what kbin.social users can see.

      Exactly the same for another /kbin or lemmy site - just replace the domain name accordingly.

    • lazy
      link
      fedilink
      391 year ago

      @KTVX94

      While I kind of agree with you in being concerned about who gets to control what we see and don’t see and the censorship aspect, there is also “the paradox of tolerance” to be considered and maybe in that light it is correct to not tolerate that subs intolerance.

      Regarding the Paradox of Tolerance:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

        • Kabe
          link
          11 year ago

          The link doesn’t suggest anything close to your conclusion.

          The discussion of where exactly line must be drawn is a valid one, though - although note that even John Rawls, who argued that society must tolerate the intolerant, conceded that there is a limit past which certain views and speech are not tolerable.

    • harmonea
      link
      fedilink
      38
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site?

      No, it’s exactly the opposite. The entire point of a decentralized federation is that while yes, the admin is in complete control of what content is allowed on his or her own instance, users who don’t like what the admin is doing can just spin up their own new instances.

      Ernest can ban this type of content if he likes. Others can take the kbin software and make a new instance where it’s welcome. Ernest can choose not to federate with that instance if they continue to push content that’s against his rules, but Ernest doesn’t have the power to dictate the direction for hundreds of millions of users’ experience like a certain centralized site’s mad CEO or admin board does.

      What would be against the nature of ActivityPub is if Ernest built something into the software to prevent it being used for types of content he doesn’t like, even on other instances.

    • updawg
      link
      fedilink
      271 year ago

      It actually is one of the strengths of the decentralized nature of the Fediverse. But there are still growing pains associated with it.

    • livus
      link
      fedilink
      161 year ago

      Remember, kbin.social is just one instance of kbin. Ernest banning something on kbin.social does not mean banning it from the fediverse.

      It could pop up on another fediverse site or even another kbin site.

    • @WhiskyTangoFoxtrot
      link
      91 year ago

      The Fediverse is decentralized. The individual instances are not. Decentralization means that there’s no one person or organization with power over the entire network, but people absolutely can and should moderate their own instances. If you don’t like the moderation policies of once instance you can move to another.

    • Ataraxia
      link
      11 year ago

      If you own a house you get a day in what is allowed in it as long as it’s not illegal. Also it’s best to nip the roots of terrorism in the bud before they use kbin as a platform to organize mass murder.