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

@doot Agreed!

@wtwagg

Ditto

@doot @probgoblin

@doot @jaz

The new wording for the code of ethics as suggested is up.

See it in the bylaws: https://ufoi.gitlab.io/constitution/united_federation_of_instances_bylaws.pdf

In the proposal:
https://ufoi.gitlab.io/constitution/united_federation_of_instances_proposal.pdf

and on the website:
https://ufoi.org/docs/code-of-ethics/

This suggestion comes from jaz.

@doot

Perhaps, I do respect and appreciate any choice someone makes for themselves to be protected.

All I know is when allys are constantly being treated like nazis it cuases a lot of credibility to be lost. It may not be fair, but the point is it hurts the community and just serves to create animosity and hate for a community that doesnt deserve it...

Plus I dont think it creates the protection you seek... If a nazi is out to attack you they know full well what the dog whistles are and just wont use it. So its not an effective tactic IMO, but again its up to you to decide what works for you, not up to me.

@probgoblin

@probgoblin

Sure ill answer... it depends on what was said and the great context.

Here is something that wouldnt be acceptably:

> Thirteen percent of the population is responsible for over half of all murders. Threfore black people are criminals by nature

Here is something that would be acceptable:

> Thirteen percent of the population is responsible for over half of all murders. Which suggests they are discriminated against and arrested dispreportionately.

The first one is against our rules since blacks are a protected group and would fall under "nefarious"... the second is ok because you are trying to address an injustice against such a group.

@doot

@doot

But they arent keeping themselves safe.. they are putting themselves in danger by attacking 95% of people who use it who arent nazis, people who are likely allies or potential allies and at best protecting themselves from a few nazis, maybe.

There is more harm done to our community than good.

What people dont realize is this is exactly the game the Nazis are playing.. a small group of nazis intentionally pick phrases or gestures that are extremely common because they WANT to pit LGBTQA against eachother and destroy communities, thats why they pick common every day phrases to do it... the issue is the LBTQA is being manipulated and ultimately destroying their own community and ostrizising allies and looking like the bad guy exactly like the Nazis want.... .so I dont think its a good choice.

Dont get me wrong I understand its out of safety, and I sympathize and understand it... but its extremely self-damaging.

@probgoblin

@doot

Ok ill add the new wording.

@jaz

@probgoblin

Oh yes it is done all the time, and I think it is monumentally destructive to the intended cause and to society.

I have a deaf friend, they use the OK symbol quite often, its a crucial part of their language. They were in a photo once making the signed and dogpiled for being a nazi, it was disgusting... one of the worst things to develop in recent society is people looking for "dogwhistles" and accusing good people using common phrases of being nazis or alt-right just because a small portion of society uses those phrases...

Just because we do it all the time doesnt mean it is justified.

@doot

@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