I’m curious what you mean by “better moderation”? Are you comparing to specific instances? Or do you mean consistency, because it’s more centralized?
Comment on Mastodon's federation consistency is laughably bad.
cerement@slrpnk.net 11 months ago
- did you have a chance to test with any GoToSocial or snac2 based instances?
- there’s also moderation issues – a lot of people leaving Xitter are ending up on Bluesky because it has better moderation and onboarding
neatchee@lemmy.world 11 months ago
cerement@slrpnk.net 11 months ago
user level moderation: blocking, muting, and filtering – and block lists, mute lists, and filter lists can all be shared and subscribed and updated
Kichae@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
User-level moderation isn’t moderation. It’s a downloading of responsibilities onto the user, but it’s not moderation. It’s the opposite of moderation.
ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 months ago
Bluesky has basically no moderation. What it has is really good user level blocking and the ability to share those block lists with others.
damon@lemmy.world 11 months ago
What’s different about the fediverse? There’s mute lists, block lists, keyword filters, they have a third party company plus a trust and safety team. They’ve taken down plenty of accounts. So again what’s no moderation? What’s better moderation and tooling on fedi? I’ve seen CSAM on Mastodon yet not on Bluesky
ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 months ago
What’s different about the fediverse is that I can pick an instance and know that the admins who run it will ban bigots, rather than just leaving the bigots alone, and telling me to ignore them.
That’s a pretty important distinction to me.
Kichae@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
Yeah, block list sharing is something that has to come to the fediverse, and it needs to be platform agnostic.