Hello World,

following feedback we have received in the last few days, both from users and moderators, we are making some changes to clarify our ToS.

Before we get to the changes, we want to remind everyone that we are not a (US) free speech instance. We are not located in US, which means different laws apply. As written in our ToS, we’re primarily subject to Dutch, Finnish and German laws. Additionally, it is our discretion to further limit discussion that we don’t consider tolerable. There are plenty other websites out there hosted in US and promoting free speech on their platform. You should be aware that even free speech in US does not cover true threats of violence.

Having said that, we have seen a lot of comments removed referring to our ToS, which were not explicitly intended to be covered by our ToS. After discussion with some of our moderators we have determined there to be both an issue with the ambiguity of our ToS to some extent, but also lack of clarity on what we expect from our moderators.

We want to clarify that, when moderators believe certain parts of our ToS do not appropriately cover a specific situation, they are welcome to bring these issues up with our admin team for review, escalating the issue without taking action themselves when in doubt. We also allow for moderator discretion in a lot of cases, as we generally don’t review each individual report or moderator action unless they’re specifically brought to admin attention. This also means that content that may be permitted by ToS can at the same time be violating community rules and therefore result in moderator action. We have added a new section to our ToS to clarify what we expect from moderators.

We are generally aiming to avoid content organizing, glorifying or suggesting to harm people or animals, but we are limiting the scope of our ToS to build the minimum framework inside which we all can have discussions, leaving a broader area for moderators to decide what is and isn’t allowed in the communities they oversee. We trust the moderators judgement and in cases where we see a gross disagreement between moderatos and admins’ criteria we can have a conversation and reach an agreement, as in many cases the decision is case-specific and context matters.

We have previously asked moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification when this was suggested in context of murder or other violent crimes. Following a discussion in our team we want to clarify that we are no longer requesting moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification in the context of violent crimes when the crime in question already happened. We will still consider suggestions of jury nullification for crimes that have not (yet) happened as advocation for violence, which is violating our terms of service.

As always, if you stumble across content that appears to be violating our site or community rules, please use Lemmys report functionality. Especially when threads are very active, moderators will not be able to go through every single comment for review. Reporting content and providing accurate reasons for reports will help moderators deal with problematic content in a reasonable amount of time.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    0·
    17 days ago

    Jury nullification should not be a banned topic. It’s perfectly legal and is the only direct way citizens can object to interpretations of the law. The very fact that the courts and government don’t want people to know of it is a testament to its effectiveness in cases where the public will opposes the government in matters of law. Particularly when public opinion differs drastically from a strict interpretation of the law, but most especially when citizens find a law, its often limited proponents, or its execution to be objectionable, unconscionable, cruel, or unwilling to take circumstances into consideration. It’s crucial for us to all understand our limited power over the government, especially when it’s acting in an oppressive manner, violating human rights, ignoring the principle of justice in favor of a literal interpretation, or is otherwise objectionable by the majority of citizens as opposed to the minority of lawmakers.

    • Tyrangle@lemmy.world
      0·
      17 days ago

      Wasn’t jury nullification historically used to sanction hate crimes against minorities? I agree that it shouldn’t be a banned topic, but I also understand how it could be a call to violence in certain contexts.

    • Syrc@lemmy.world
      0·
      15 days ago

      And it’s not a banned topic, in fact.

      Talking about the concept of jury nullification, about the times where it was applied, and how it could be applied to current cases are all allowed, according to what they wrote.

      The only thing that’s not allowed is using it as a motive to incentivize future crimes (violent ones specifically, as other types of crimes would obviously not fall under “advocation of violence”). Aka “they should kill (guy), whoever does it will probably not even go to jail because of jury nullification”.

        • Syrc@lemmy.world
          0·
          14 days ago

          I’m seriously worried about most commenters here’s reading comprehension. This whole post is saying “you know all the stuff mods deleted recently? We had a talk and 99% of that is now allowed” and people are still acting like this turned into some insanely policed pro-capitalism instance.

          Are all these people really that upset at not being able to use this specific instance to convince people to kill more CEOs? I mean, if someone is already that fed up with the system I don’t think a random Lemmy comment is what will push them over the edge.

          • Skeezix@lemmy.worldEnglish
            0·
            13 days ago

            Now that humanity’s younger generations have advanced to 100% screen world, reading comprehension and critical thinking skills have been lost.