We all use some sort of automod bot to flag or even ban accounts.
We've all banned accounts for way less.

Am I supposed to be offended that this user, of all people, was banned from anywhere?
Or that an LLM summary is linked in the modlog for it?
If an admin reviewed it, why should I care?

Am I supposed to get mad about political profiling?
/looks around to literally everywhere in the fediverse and gestures wildly.

My only gripe is it would maybe be more environmentally friendly to just skim that profile instead of using an LLM but whatever.
"Save the planet, ban people with the old ban hammer."

IDK this whole thing feels like stirring shit for the sake of it. WTF is even the point of this post.

My point only was that I don't know why someone on piefed.social feels the need to post in lemmy.world about something that is what appears to me to be an internal instance choice.

Db0 to you directly, and for everyone reading, you have done more for the fediverse than the vast majority here and are up with the developers in my book. You have built tools for the fediverse that most will never see that keep onslaughts of abuse from hitting our servers. Personally, you have helped me with my own server helping me debug now almost three years ago. It will take much more than rimu's personal issues with you to burn through the goodwill you've built up with me, and I assume the other admins.

Personally, while I am not a mod or an admin of this channel, I would argue that a personal vendetta is not relevant to the fediverse channel amd I hope these posts are both removed. I agree that they are thinly veiled attempts at trying to manipulate admins.

It's not like this is a bot that scans everyone's posts and automatically bans them, it's an entirely manual process to download a comment history and AI ctrl-f for stuff.

There has been some deceptive information spread around what this tool seems to actually do. Which is especially concerning after the recent (proven) misinformation about Nazis infiltrating our instances.

The cold hard fact is that there are a lot of bad actors, even here on Lemmy. Most users are sheltered from it because of good mods and admins. It's easy to shit on them, but these people sort through the absolute muck. There's a reason we don't have racists and gore and CP here, and it's because they keep all of it at bay away from eyes here. I know this because I firsthand have seen some of the permanently scarring shit, and it was only a small fraction of what mods on world deal with.

Soi don't blame moderated arching out tools that help them not see it.

However each admin and mod have to decide for themselves and their users what is best for them, and that is purely an admin level decision for their server. The fediverse is very cool that everyone can make their own rules, and I like that nuance.

Also, wtf is up with you calling the entire idea of decentralization into question? Internet services require resources to run, and the barrier to entry for hosting an instance is relatively low. It's absurd to call instances feudal fiefdoms when anybody with a bit of time and disposable income can theoretically set one up. What is the alternative, all those "fiefdoms" needing to report to a monarch who will only use their power to protect marginalized groups from bigotry(trust me bro)?

What makes it especially egregious is that you aren't simply a user or even an instance admin, but the head developer of an entire section of the fediverse. You are not a neutral party arguing ideals, you are a person who could theoretically try to crown yourself king. You focusing so much of your efforts on attacking instances that you have ideological problems with is worrying.

I wouldn't trust an admin like that to protect me from bigotry on their server, nor would I want them to dictate moderation for instances on their platform. Since you seem so keen on highlighting how your instance bans fewer people than others, how could I trust you to not mandate tolerance of a "diversity of opinions" like another notable instance that gives fewer bans?

It's not a new thing, since sentiment analysis based moderation has been around for a long while. Where it becomes a problem is

• The sentiment analysis makes mistakes and it gets tedious to deal with platforms that use it for automated moderation. This is a big problem with old social media platforms like Reddit, or comment sections in places like Instagram/Facebook.
• It can be used as a flimsy excuse to take moderation actions when such actions aren't necessary, which makes users trust that moderation team less

I also don't agree with the privacy angle since all content here is public by nature, but I do see value in discussing these other problems since that's what this community is for?

Also, while Rimu can defederate, letting people discuss it first is better. Best case scenario, the groups find some kind of compromise. Otherwise it lets people weigh in on the platform policies and federation status, instead of having admins make that call on their own

@db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com is an admin, he owns the server, he can do what he likes on that server.

As I said yesterday, and overwhelmingly everyone chimed in agreeing: This is the nature of the fediverse. You do not get to make rules for the entire fediverse.

You are on piefed.social, just defederate if you dislike it so much.

Yesterday's Post