People Twitter

9594 readers

652 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

678

I totally agree, too much is too much. (infosec.pub)

submitted 3 days ago by roserose56@lemmy.zip to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

190 comments fedilink hide all child comments

And yes, I know people will say block keywords and communities, but people don't understand some communities have rules and people must follow them.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The issue is that users generally don't get a say. Even in the fediverse, moderators aren't chosen democratically. Yeah, you can start your own community and try to build it up, but inertia is not in your favor.

Anyway, my point is that a "no politics" rule is not really reasonable. You can have one, and you can enforce it however you want. It will always just end up causing issues though. For example: look up Nazi degenerate art. It's just art, right? However, to them it was political, and it was political in a way they didn't like, so they removed it from society.

No moderator is perfect. Even if you trust them, blurry rules probably aren't the best. There's better ways to define the intent than "no politics" that create clear borders of what's allowed and what isn't. Blurry rules are usually best for those who want to abuse it.

[–] sexy_peach@feddit.org 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The issue is that users generally don’t get a say.

Yes that is because they don't carry any of the responsibilities of running the server. Why would they be allowed to decide?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I didn't say they should. Your comment implied that they did (or at least implies participation is consent). I just pointed out that they, in fact, do not. There is no value judgement in that statement.