• Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    139
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    5.0.1: Before using the website, remember you will be interacting with actual, real people and communities. Lemmy.World is not a place for you to attack other groups of people. Every one of our users has a right to browse and interact with the website and all of its contents free of treatment such as harassment, bullying, violation of privacy or threats of violence.

    • MrMusAddict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      In my opinion this is actually better than the CoC. The only thing “missing” is the definition of which qualities you shouldn’t discriminate against. But that’s now generalized into “groups of people”.

      I still can’t discriminate against people based on any qualification. Hell, I technically can’t discriminate against “pineapple on pizza eaters”.

      • Dharma Curious@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        55
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Good. Because it’s fucking delicious and I don’t care what the internet says. We all loved it in the 90s, and nothing has changed. It’s still delicious, we just do less coke now.

        • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can discriminate all you want, you just can’t harass, bully, violate privacy or threaten violence.

        • taladar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think you can’t read it too literally. Otherwise you also can’t discriminate against “people who wrote their comment later” and so you can never stop reading the comments for fear of discriminating between “early comment writers” and “late comment writers”.

          • snooggums@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Literal is the only way these things are supposed to be read.

            They could easily fix it by saying “groups (except for those that promote discrimination and/or hate such as nazis and racists)”

        • MrMusAddict@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I just replied this to another commenter, but that’s a bad faith argument. The ToS also says to not engage in illegal activity. The admonishment of Nazi’s and Racists is an admonishment of illegal evil.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            Being a Nazi is not illegal in most jurisdictions. It certainly wasn’t illegal in Nazi Germany.

          • PM_ME_FAT_ENBIES@lib.lgbt
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Bruh I hate to break this to you but nearly all governments are racist. Have you not heard of what the US did to black people for 300 years?

          • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Uh, the US has vetoed multiple attempts by the UN to condemn the glorification of Nazis. I hate to break it to you, but Nazis and racists are not illegal.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        By my reading of it, you can still discriminate against pineapple pizza eaters, or any other group whatsoever, you just can’t harass, bully, violate their privacy or threaten them with violence. Which is fine by me, if someone wants to make a community only for ginger haired people and ban anyone they think isn’t naturally ginger, that’s their perogative.

        • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          That was my takeaway, too, and I think it’s positive. The nice thing is, if it turns out that the policy fosters behavior that’s bad for the broader community, they can change it.

          • clueless_stoner@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course we would, and that’s also exactly why we invited users to discuss and provide feedback while launching it. It is a living document, and we hope to update and improve it periodically and consistently.

            • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Some people have given you guys a lot of flack, but I really think you’re making a thoughtful, good faith effort to do things right, and I think you’re doing well. There have been a couple things that I thought were the wrong decision, but (1) they’ve been relatively minor, and (2) they’ve been reasonable even if I might have chosen differently. I very much appreciate the thought that goes into running this place.

              • clueless_stoner@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Thank you. I appreciate your sincere response, and I can assure you the rest of our team will too. Differences in decisions may naturally occur, of course, but I think being able to reason things is what matters in the end. Here’s wishing you a great one.

              • SUKKONDIS@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                LOL the OP of this post is YOU. I remember the blahaj stuff. You had another alt, dronerights, too.

        • MrMusAddict@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That’s a bad faith argument. The ToS also says to not engage in illegal activity. The admonishment of Nazi’s and Pedophiles is an admonishment of illegal evil.

          Your inclusion of Republicans is a bit of an extreme juxtaposition. Feel free to admonish the individual evil views of Republicans, but to discriminate against Republicans purely for their association is rightly against ToS.

    • boatswain@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Need some context here: is this what we removed, something that’s already somewhere else, a proposed replacement, or something else?