Piefed is Lemmy with cross-posts collapsed to one thread, and controversial developers (moderation defaults)
Would love to hear which moderation defaults of PieFed are so controversial. Your phrasing seems to indicate that Lemmy developers’ support for Putin and Xi Jinping is no more controversial than Piefed developers’ preference to silence trolls and fascists.
The rules for Piefed.social are available here. The software Piefed ships with some default moderation options enabled, which can be disabled should the server admin choose to do so. I think having stricter moderation enabled by default when people set up a new server that they may or may not know how to manage effectively is obviously a better choice than to set the default to “anything goes”.
The fact that they are implemented in a code level is scary. Even though I disagree with the political views of the Lemmy Devs, the controversial views aren’t reflected in the product they coded, whereas in pie.fed it’s hard coded. Like, why not let instance admins configure those moderation things? Last I read about it there were some filters hard coded in the code that not even admins were able to change if they didn’t change the code itself.
If the default can be changed now, cool. It’s still pretty scary that it’s an opt out feature that had to be changed from forced to opt out though. Again, as much I disagree with the political views of Lemmy Devs, those views didn’t leak into the code of their product. How they moderate ml and such is another thing, I am talking about the code itself.
Please read Lessig’s Code, and Other Laws of Cyberspace. There is no system code that doesn’t implement rules, and no rules that aren’t impacted by its creators’ biases. What matters is intent. It’s clear, the devs of PieFed by implementing anti-Nazi mod tools do not intend to ban people who were born in 1988 or otherwise. You use an edge case to argue a rare injustice trumps the obvious good of tossing neonazis off their platform.
Which computer software is ever not implemented on a “code level”?
The lead developer recently started a thread in the Piefed meta community specifically to open for people to ask questions about these things. In full:
I have received word that there are people combing through the PieFed code looking for anything that might be harmful. This is excellent and can only make PieFed better and less harmful.
We appreciate their interest in PieFed and look forward to answering any questions and showing people around the code. Please join us at https://chat.piefed.social/ or https://matrix.to/#/#piefed-developers:matrix.org.
There’s no need to listen to rumors and amateur speculation when we’re right here and happy to help. Come on in, the water’s fine!
Nobody in the thread managed to come up with an even remotely critical question. I’m not in the chat so I’m not sure if there were any interesting discussions there, but it’s safe to say it’s hard to find the weird conspiracies floating around reflected in the actual development.
If you have an issue, ask in !piefed_meta@piefed.social. If the community agrees your concern is valid I can guarantee you it’ll be addressed.
There’s also the question of what exactly would constitute controversial moderation. If we could hard code out fascists, stalinists, and misogynists, I would be entirely in favour. There’s no need to supply these people with tools for their nonsense. My only issue with it is that it’s not realistic without generating false positives. I don’t speak for Piefed here though, just my personal opinion.
Would love to hear which moderation defaults of PieFed are so controversial. Your phrasing seems to indicate that Lemmy developers’ support for Putin and Xi Jinping is no more controversial than Piefed developers’ preference to silence trolls and fascists.
The rules for Piefed.social are available here. The software Piefed ships with some default moderation options enabled, which can be disabled should the server admin choose to do so. I think having stricter moderation enabled by default when people set up a new server that they may or may not know how to manage effectively is obviously a better choice than to set the default to “anything goes”.
The fact that they are implemented in a code level is scary. Even though I disagree with the political views of the Lemmy Devs, the controversial views aren’t reflected in the product they coded, whereas in pie.fed it’s hard coded. Like, why not let instance admins configure those moderation things? Last I read about it there were some filters hard coded in the code that not even admins were able to change if they didn’t change the code itself.
If the default can be changed now, cool. It’s still pretty scary that it’s an opt out feature that had to be changed from forced to opt out though. Again, as much I disagree with the political views of Lemmy Devs, those views didn’t leak into the code of their product. How they moderate ml and such is another thing, I am talking about the code itself.
Please read Lessig’s Code, and Other Laws of Cyberspace. There is no system code that doesn’t implement rules, and no rules that aren’t impacted by its creators’ biases. What matters is intent. It’s clear, the devs of PieFed by implementing anti-Nazi mod tools do not intend to ban people who were born in 1988 or otherwise. You use an edge case to argue a rare injustice trumps the obvious good of tossing neonazis off their platform.
Again, what exactly are you talking about?
Which computer software is ever not implemented on a “code level”?
The lead developer recently started a thread in the Piefed meta community specifically to open for people to ask questions about these things. In full:
Nobody in the thread managed to come up with an even remotely critical question. I’m not in the chat so I’m not sure if there were any interesting discussions there, but it’s safe to say it’s hard to find the weird conspiracies floating around reflected in the actual development.
If you have an issue, ask in !piefed_meta@piefed.social. If the community agrees your concern is valid I can guarantee you it’ll be addressed.
There’s also the question of what exactly would constitute controversial moderation. If we could hard code out fascists, stalinists, and misogynists, I would be entirely in favour. There’s no need to supply these people with tools for their nonsense. My only issue with it is that it’s not realistic without generating false positives. I don’t speak for Piefed here though, just my personal opinion.