Comment on Lemmy.world removes its rules against discrimination

ech@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• Geert@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Yes but what about black lesbians? They are cool to harass right? It’s not literally explained in the document so it must be!

  source

  • BolexForSoup@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Have never read a discrimination clause before? You don’t have to list literally ever combination. This is ignorant at its most charitable interpretation.

    source
  • Boiglenoight@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    HEAR HERE! (I DON’T KNOW WHICH ONE TO USE WHEN SHOUTING THIS EXPRESSION IN SUPPORT OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING)

    source

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Heer heer!

      source
    • intensely_human@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      hear hear

      source
• BolexForSoup@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Not a single mention of discrimination because it doesn’t say anything about religion/race/gender/etc. It needs to specify this to be a rule about discrimination. Even the US federal government - which is the base line - has this spelled out.

  source

  • ech@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    While I don’t think it would be unwarranted, it’s also not specifically necessary. They can interpret that line to mean anything they want. It’s a volunteer run, privately hosted reddit clone. It doesn’t need to be as intricate as US law (which I not sure why that’s “baseline” for anything).

    source

    • Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      “Just trust me bro” is never a good model.

      Because maybe the current admins are all great people who will do right. But we don’t know if all future admins will be. And if we get a “rules lawyer” coming down on a complaint that some community is being horrifically racist as “Well, it isn’t against the rules…”

      But also? The world is an increasingly shitty place. Twitter is run by a straight up white supremacist. Having this kind of verbiage goes a long way toward indicating if a place can even possibly be a “safe space” as it were.

      But also: If the idea is that we should just trust the admins: Why have any rules at all?

      source

      • ech@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Nothing here is written in stone. If shitty people take over, there’s absolutely nothing to stop them throwing out the rules as written, or just ignoring them.

        But also: If the idea is that we should just trust the admins: Why have any rules at all?

        All we have here is trust. These rules are more so the admins proclaiming their intended goals and actions. Again, there’s nothing to stop an instance admin from doing whatever they want. Could it be more verbose? Absolutely. But as for the claims that the new rules show any deviousness on the part of the current admins, or that having better written rules will inherently protect anyone? Those don’t really hold any merit, imo.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • BolexForSoup@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The federal government sets the bare minimum protections for people.

      source

      • Ignacio@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        The federal government sets the bare minimum protections for people in United States, not in other countries of the world. And internet covers the entire world, not only United States. That's how I see it.

        source