Hello World,

following feedback we have received in the last few days, both from users and moderators, we are making some changes to clarify our ToS.

Before we get to the changes, we want to remind everyone that we are not a (US) free speech instance. We are not located in US, which means different laws apply. As written in our ToS, we’re primarily subject to Dutch, Finnish and German laws. Additionally, it is our discretion to further limit discussion that we don’t consider tolerable. There are plenty other websites out there hosted in US and promoting free speech on their platform. You should be aware that even free speech in US does not cover true threats of violence.

Having said that, we have seen a lot of comments removed referring to our ToS, which were not explicitly intended to be covered by our ToS. After discussion with some of our moderators we have determined there to be both an issue with the ambiguity of our ToS to some extent, but also lack of clarity on what we expect from our moderators.

We want to clarify that, when moderators believe certain parts of our ToS do not appropriately cover a specific situation, they are welcome to bring these issues up with our admin team for review, escalating the issue without taking action themselves when in doubt. We also allow for moderator discretion in a lot of cases, as we generally don’t review each individual report or moderator action unless they’re specifically brought to admin attention. This also means that content that may be permitted by ToS can at the same time be violating community rules and therefore result in moderator action. We have added a new section to our ToS to clarify what we expect from moderators.

We are generally aiming to avoid content organizing, glorifying or suggesting to harm people or animals, but we are limiting the scope of our ToS to build the minimum framework inside which we all can have discussions, leaving a broader area for moderators to decide what is and isn’t allowed in the communities they oversee. We trust the moderators judgement and in cases where we see a gross disagreement between moderatos and admins’ criteria we can have a conversation and reach an agreement, as in many cases the decision is case-specific and context matters.

We have previously asked moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification when this was suggested in context of murder or other violent crimes. Following a discussion in our team we want to clarify that we are no longer requesting moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification in the context of violent crimes when the crime in question already happened. We will still consider suggestions of jury nullification for crimes that have not (yet) happened as advocation for violence, which is violating our terms of service.

As always, if you stumble across content that appears to be violating our site or community rules, please use Lemmys report functionality. Especially when threads are very active, moderators will not be able to go through every single comment for review. Reporting content and providing accurate reasons for reports will help moderators deal with problematic content in a reasonable amount of time.

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    I know people want to celebrate the perish of a bad guy (me included) but if that endangers existance of lemmy.world then I think it’s fair to take this celebration somewhere else.

    On the ehtics pov I’m not quite conviced that celebrating death is entirely unethical. Some people are bad and society is better without them and these Dutch, Finnish and German laws might make sense locally but definitely don’t make much sense in a global context.

  • Kyrgizion@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    A bunch of shit and piss from bootlicking crybabies.

    I will gladly move home instances you sycophantic fucks. Maybe your precious billionaires will let you suck their cocks for some of that sweet, sweet capitalist cum.

    Disgusted to have .world as my home instance. Will be switching momentarily.

  • Pyrin@kbin.melroy.org
    0·
    6 months ago

    Before we get to the changes, we want to remind everyone that we are not a (US) free speech instance.

    That my friend, is a huge issue.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      0·
      6 months ago

      Even US free speech arguments don’t apply here. That refers to what the US government can restrict US citizens from talking about. A private computer system, especially one located in and operated out of a foreign country, has never fallen under this umbrella.

      • Pyrin@kbin.melroy.org
        0·
        6 months ago

        Man, it must kind of like, suck to have any of your speech limited in some parts of the world not the USA.

        You can pinpoint anything about America all you want, we hear the shit all of the time. Europeans and other international entities alike just loooooove having a field day with making fun of America. Fine, whatever, some of it is valid and we don’t have all of our shit together. But in some cases and in some matters, America still has some edge over whatever the EU is doing.

        And the sore fact of the matter is, is that if the EU was so cocky, how come some of the time it can’t do the big boy decisions without America’s assistance, huh? All the while some countries limiting freedom of expression and speech.

  • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nzEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    Everyone who opposes the assassination of one CEO is glorifying the thousands of murders he committed. It’s one or the other.

  • azuth@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    Is your opinion that advocating for jury nullification would constitute some violation of Dutch, Finnish or German law based on legal advice?

  • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    Awesome response. I do not hold any grudges against the early over-moderation that took place. It is truly a sensitive subject. However, I feel allowing free speech (within reason) in a situation like this is important for both sides (the Bourgeoisie and all of us poors) as it gives us a chance to vent some pent up steam and it hopefully gives them an insight into how close things are to getting out of control and give them a chance to correct some bad behaviors.

  • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    Personally my big takeaway from the comments here is that either many people think administrating a large internet platform is a joke and happens on its own and you don’t find 10+ legal notices in the PO box every week, or that - and I’ve read about this before - reading comprehension in the english-speaking world has fallen dramatically in recent years and people are genuinely unable to read paragraphs of text of non-trivial content and/or shifting subjects within same sentences, something you learn around 6th grade in school but sadly rarely need after school in modern times.

  • joel_feila@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    So i can talk about a case of jury nullification that happened last year, but not talk aboit how that should happen every time. Unless the crime was non violent then im ok to say “that should happen all the time”.

  • Gemini24601@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    While I agree that the murder of the CEO can be morally justified in certain aspects, we have to face the facts. Murder is murder, and I believe glorification of it is wrong. Wouldn’t the killing of a CEO just lead to the appointment of another, making the whole thing pointless? It’s possible that a new CEO will do things differently, but they’d probably do more or less the same. In the end, all the murder achieves is CEOs fearing for their safety and eventually hiring bodyguards, making them even more disconnected from society, and even less likely to donate to charity or the poor. For these reasons, I think lemmy.world is doing the right thing, I don’t think that murder of anyone not convicted of war crimes should be glorified, I’d prefer to stay neutral on such topics.