Is it actually possible to instance-level ban a community that’s hosted by another instance without defederating? I’m under the belief that it isn’t, but if I’m wrong on that, then I think I’d agree with you here.
leigh
joined 1 year ago
Let me know when you find out what the word “disingenuous” means.
Oh please, no one here is calling anyone’s body “morally wrong”.
I don’t need to “see if [I] agree or disagree with [the admin’s] assessment.” It wouldn’t make any difference whether I do or not. And it doesn’t matter what the community’s name is. By going to look, I’d be knowingly putting myself in a position to potentially see something that looks like CSAM. Why would I want to do that??
But a lot of people made the choice to do that, presumably for the sake of arguing with an admin on an instance many of them don’t even use. That is disheartening.
Don’t be disingenuous. Genuine consent practices also consider that not everyone else consents to witnessing their play, so they don’t do it where it’s not welcomed. And it’s not welcomed on Blahaj Zone, in this case. That’s all.
It’s not about whether the community actually skirts the line or not. It’s about how many people thought “gee, someone thinks these pictures are CSAM-adjacent, I need to go see for myself”. That’s disheartening.
Sometimes they go together, sometimes they don’t.
Oh nooooooes, a disaster!!!!
🙄🙄🙄
Yeah, see, it’s that conflation of “emotional” and “not thinking clearly” that bothers me. Those aren’t the same thing, despite the dominant cultural narrative to the contrary. Sometimes they go together, sometimes they don’t.
I am very disheartened by the number of people replying here who read “a community skirting the line trying to look like CSAM” and felt the need to go purposefully seek out that community to look through its images.
is this concern based in fact, or emotion?
Ada was clear in another comment thread that yes, emotion was absolutely involved in her decision. That isn’t a bad thing. Why is there a social attitude that decision-making is only valid if it’s cold and unfeeling?
Personally I’m in the camp of “let consenting adults do adult things”
Me too. I don’t think anyone is arguing against that. Anyone can still access LemmyNSFW’s content elsewhere, Blahaj Zone simply isn’t going to relay it anymore because some of it is incompatible with Ada’s goals in nurturing this community.
But if it is in fact legal, and well moderated, then is there a problem?
Yes. Legality has nothing to do with acceptability. This instance already bans lots of content that doesn’t actually violate any laws. It’s a judgment call.
Congrats!! 🥳
No, really, I used to end with negative scores all. the. time. 😅
Ada’s judgment is not infallible, but I’d rather trust her judgment than go personally look for something she initially (and admitted mistakenly) thought was CSAM. There are two possible outcomes: (1) I see something that looks similar to CSAM to me and I feel gross about it, or (2) I don’t see any problem with the content, but it doesn’t change anything because she’s the admin here and is still unwilling to host copies of it on her server where she evaluates anything that gets reported.
In either case, I can still enjoy content from LemmyNSFW elsewhere if I so choose — just not at Blahaj Zone.
I think the two sides here are having different debates. Yes, there are legal adults who may appear underage, and they should have the same freedom any other adult has to post explicit pictures of themselves if they so choose. But a community that specifically encourages “child-like” content (as the community’s rules said at the time this decision was made) is going to gather multiple examples of this. Even if Ada fully trusts LemmyNSFW’s admins to 100% prevent any real CSAM from being federated, she’d still be exposed to reports of “potential CSAM” from there. She’s a community-building volunteer who willingly examines reported content that gets federated to Blahaj Zone, but she doesn’t want to view any more of it than is strictly necessary to protect her community. So she’s unwilling to federate with an instance that knowingly hosts such a community (even if the content is 100% legal) because it would cause more reports as time goes on. The content also upsets her on a personal level, which is fine — she’s a human being and is allowed to have feelings.
Other admins at other instances might not have the same aversion to this specific type of legal content that Ada does, so maybe they don’t mind having it copied onto their servers. That’s cool. The Fediverse is great like that, users aren’t stuck with the decisions of any single person in charge. Ada announced her decision so that all we Blahaj Zone users would know about it, and if any of us feel strongly enough (and clearly a number of people do), we can vote with our feet and go use one of those other instances so we also don’t lose access to the communities we use here.
This is my final comment on the matter. You may have the last word if you wish.