Hello Lemmy moderators!

The Lemmy.World administrator team is planning to release a Moderator Code of Conduct for Lemmy soon.

Even though there will be some basic principles we will follow, which can be found here, we still need your valuable input. We’d like to hear your suggestions on what to add to this Code of Conduct, as you know best about what you want and need.

This Code of Conduct would lay out the official rules, set principles and goals for Lemmy.World moderators, and for any other instance that wishes to follow it.

With Love,
The Lemmy.World Administrator (Team)

  • Tenthrow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    Do you best to identify personal bias before moderating content (ie political oposition). Echo chambers are discouraged but poor behavior is not to be tolerated. IMO.

  • Rooki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ban / Remove content with a reason and put it in the reason textfield. ( So no “.” or “bruh”, rather “Rule 1 - Insulted a fellow member” … )

    • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Avoid permanent bans and use progressive bans instead. 24 hour ban, 3 day ban, 7 day ban etc… permanent bans just lead to the user making a different account and not learning from their mistake.

      • recursive_recursion [they/them]@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        at first I was gonna disagree with

        Avoid permanent bans

        but your point on

        permanent bans just lead to the user making a different account and not learning from their mistake.

        makes a lot of sense👍

        permanent bans probably makes sense when the person reapeatedly fails to learn after a couple of progressive bans(/suspensions?)

        • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Permanent bans probably make sense when the person repeatedly fails to learn after a couple of progressive bans(/suspensions?)

          Correct, let’s encourage a community member to learn and grow. Perma banning causes instant anger and leads to more drama. With progressive bans, users understand the consequences of their actions and that they will get longer until they are permanent.

      • TheSpookiestUser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I disagree with this. There are some offenses from which we can’t reasonably expect people to “learn” from - bigotry, death threats, doxxing, spambotting, ban evasion. These are what permanent bans are most often handed out for anyway. If I saw someone drop a slur in my community, my vote would be to permanently ban them.

        • PriorProject@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are some offenses from which we can’t reasonably expect people to “learn” from…

          People always learn something, though not always what one is trying to teach. Immediate permanent bans often teach them to make an alt and come back with the same attitude and a chip on their shoulder. Temp bans leverage their investment in their existing account to either encourage them to leave the community they’re not welcome in or return with a better understanding of the rules.

          Do temp bans work every time? No, definitely not. Are permanent bans trivially circumvented in a federated ecosystem with not even the barest of account verification policies? Yes, definitely… which means permabans are a much weaker response here than in other spaces with better account verification. I’d submit that escalating temp bans are a strictly superior in such an environment because investment in one’s existing account is very nearly the only leverage mods have and should be maximized.

          • TheSpookiestUser@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            The exact behavior you describe with people circumventing permabans has already happened in my community with a temp ban. Person made multiple accounts on other instances to circumvent a temp ban for excessive self promotion of their own stuff (to the point of spam). We tried escalating temp bans and it didn’t work, they just did that anyway.

            I advocate for permabans for egregious violations for two reasons: acknowledgement that there’s zero tolerance for truly abhorrent behavior and to decrease the bookkeeping of keeping track of multiple temp bans. An escalating temp ban system works for minor offenses where a permanent ban isn’t warranted, though.

            • recursive_recursion [they/them]@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I advocate for permabans for egregious violations for two reasons: acknowledgement that there’s zero tolerance for truly abhorrent behavior and to decrease the bookkeeping of keeping track of multiple temp bans. An escalating temp ban system works for minor offenses where a permanent ban isn’t warranted, though.

              I think your suggestion strikes a good balance as outright banning toxic behavior such as racism can act as a clear signifier that actions like it are contradictory and unwanted especially in reference(context) to the community’s goals and TOS

        • Kurroth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You think a permaban will stop that person from making a new account? or probably already having an alt(s)?

        • 108beadz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well—some slurs are obvious no-go. Then there are slurs that are widely used thoughtlessly in high schools. Ex.—recently saw a poster call a rule “retarded.” Removed, noted “incivility, disrespectful to people with developmental disabilities.” No blowback, peace restored with minimal unhappiness.

          Edit: oh nuts, this my alt account. Should have posted from 108beads@lemm.ee. Apologies.

          • TheSpookiestUser@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            For the record I actually agree with this. I had a similar policy toward “retarded” and the like in previous communities. Not because I thought it was “not as bad” but because it’s more likely that people (especially younger people) could have incorporated this into their vocabulary passively without even really thinking about the implications. These people can learn, but most others who use slurs can’t, at least not from a stranger over the internet.

  • TheSpookiestUser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think one thing that will be important to stop this place from encountering the same pitfalls as Reddit (I know people are tired of hearing about em, but given the 1:1 similarities between Reddit and Lemmy, I think it bears mentioning) is to put a handle on the reach any one moderator can have. Moderators should be encouraged to mod communities that they have an interest in and not “collect” mod positions. This is not a problem now, but I foresee it being a problem in the future if the place grows. Limits on the number of communities one person can moderate at once may be good, or something more nebulous referring to good-faith moderation practices.

  • Quinten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago
    1. Set clear expectations of what people can expect from your community.

    2. Mark your community ‘unofficial’ in the sidebar if there are no ties with the company or brand.

    Those are the only two that come to mind.

      • Quinten@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah I understand, and we understand the concept of Lemmy. But some people in a highly expensive office do not really care.

          • Quinten@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Big businesses in movies, economics, influencers etc.

            Almost every community website require in some form to claim ‘unofficial’ if they have nothing to do with the brand of business itself.

            • El Barto@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh, okay. I’m not worried about those. Big businesses ruined reddit for me, so I’m okay with them not understanding Lemmy.

  • Sean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Will we still to allowed to phrase comment removals as [the rule they broke] + [snarky comment]?