🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@jaz

Yes it is what is happening on the gitlab.. people who are interested in the project and feel they are likely to want to be members (or even just want to provide input) are there trying to improve the wording..

The site is live to ensure we can get more people interested and tentatively wanting to join so we can get more heads on the gitlab and improve it.

What i dont want is a msall isolated group of people to decide for everyone... we get everyone involved who likes the basic idea, then we work on refining it as a group, then int he end see whos left.

I dont get why this seems to upset you,.

@doot

@doot

Someone ( https://toot.wales/@jaz/109475181545787806 @jaz ) just suggested this language, I like it.. .what do you think.

"any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor."

@jaz

Thats fair.. iw as going to respond saying it is needed at least in a seperate section, but I agree with you, it isnt needed. Because if we say respectful opinions are allowed then that is forced upon all instance moderation, and frankly i think instances should have the flexibility to moderate locally.

Did you already create a MR for this? if not i can create one.. ill support it and I suspect the federation will approve your suggested wording.

@doot

@jaz

Literally every country has.. corporations are not democratic enttities that are formed by the comming together of independent enttiities.

In fact it is quite common to FIRST gather the members of an organization that wish to form a union, and THEN decide as a group what bylaws should exist that satisfied everyone.

PErsonally I think this is the right move, i think it would be in bad taste for me to dictate the bylaws to everyone and then expect people to follow it. This is supposed to be a democracy, the bylaws are a starting point, enttities join to try to help us create a good set of bylaws, those instnaces can leave if things head in the wrong direction.. and hopefully we get a good result in the end.

You are welcome to wait if you wish bylaws to be dictated to you rather than being a part of their creation, no worries, we arent going anywhere.

@doot

@jaz

The air quotes int he proposal, constitution, and the website have all now been removed.

You misinterprited the intent, and if you have a better wording that prevents such miscommunication in the future I am welcome to hear it.

The point here is to say as long as you arent uttering hate speech or being nefarious to a protected group, then opinions which are not hateful or attacking but are just not popular are ok... how can we express that better?

@doot

@doot The story behind that is a bit ironic.. you see the reasopn you saw so many bad actors use it is because... well.. it was explicitly taken from QOTO and used as the default set of rules in certain fediverse software. So basically anyone who spins up a new instance has a version of our rules as the default... sadly this resulted in many bad actors using it.

@jaz

I wasnt the one who wrote that, the air quotes were added later by an edit... I honestly cant imagine why it is in air quotes.. I will remove it now.

Sorry I didnt see your issue. The site is live, but the bylaws arent final. We first need to get instances and have a mechanism in place for voting, and only then can we finalize it from draft to published.

Anyway making that edit now.

@doot

@doot I agree, and am happy to do so... sadly im not sure what that wording would look like. I have tried a dozen iterations and people always complain.. and when i ask for a suggestionn I can never get one.

@doot Sorry if im being argumentative.. its not my intent.

@doot This is true.. look bad actors can have an absolutely perfect ToS and still act like pieces of shit. The fact that they have some set ofrules they dont really technically follow is a shame, but we cant damn all usage of a phrase or language just because some bad actors used it and then violated it.

@doot

We tried to address that in the wording, if you feel it isnt clear we are more than welcome to improved verbiage and would welcome you edit suggestions.

> Posing anti-trans sentiment as "legitimate concerns", speaking in scientific lingo so as to seem you're approaching it on the basis of fact rather than hatred.

Trans people are a protected group we explicitly list, what you describe would be "nefarious" as such this would be explicitly against the rules and not simply "unpopular". This is why we say "nefarious" and not just hate speech by itself.

> Similar anti-migrant sentiment can be posed as economic concern. The intent not to be to actually discuss them from what are posed as rational positions that put sentiment aside, but to spread hateful ideas under a veil of legitimacy

If they are hateful ideas then they cant be voiced rrespectfully IMO, this would violate the respectful clause as that simply is not respectful no matter how you word it. That said, again, if you have a better way to word this im all for it.

@doot You too.

@doot I think its important to include the full context here... the wording is specifically:

> No "hate speech", speech that nefariously expresses a form of prejudice or threatens a people of a protected characteristic (such as age, disability, ethnicity, gender, pregnancy, religion, sex or sexuality - unpopular opinions
voiced respectfully is fine).

What is being said here is that no hate speech or attacks or anything of that sort are allowed against any of the protected and marginalized groups... **outside** of that if you have an opinion which is not an attack on one of these groups, but people just dont like it, then its fine.

Forcing people to only speak popular opinions and banning people for unpopular ones is highly problematic IMO. As long as you are respectful, and do not disenfranchize marcganialized groups I think not having fear of being banned just for being unpopular is a good thing.

I'd be happy to hear your opinions on why "you can only say popular things" would be a good thing?

@doot No problem, thanks for the lovely chat.

@doot If your instance has any interest in being in the UFoI I know I'd be honored to have you. You are exactly the sort of people (and your instance) that I think would be a very positive influence in our development.

If you decide you would want in feel free to let me know: https://UFoI.org

@doot Mistakes happen, I wont fault you for making one, I make plenty. The important part is if we correct our mistakes and improve, so your good.

I fault the fediverse for this. I have always had the policy that if a server blocks us I respectfully and politely email them once, and only once in the hope they are willing to resolve it. I dont always know when we get blocked though.

Sadly people do sometimes scream harassment at contacting them, and i can understand why that makes others scared to talk, it is a huge problem in the fdiverse where simply trying to resolve issues maturely is conflated with harassment.

As I said, this is a problem I am doing my best to solve as I feel if we just have conversations a lot of these issues can get resolved.

@doot

I do really appreciate that you are civil about this, I have a great deal of respect for you, not for agreeing with me, but for being civil.

I would **never** allow someone to say the things you said and if it did slip by me then that is concerning. But without even a single report I cant act.

I think the biggest problem in the fediverse is people fly off the handle and never once just have a conversation. If your response had been to just message me and let me know whats going on I would have suspended that user right away, QOTO was always about being respectful, it was the first rule we ever added to our ToS.

keep in mind with 30,000 followers I and 25K users I cant see everything that flys by, i try to, but things can be missed, communication is so important. Which is the very reason im trying to create the UFoI, so admins can start communicating and resolve these issues in good faith.

@alex @Barmaid @deadwitchflying