How can a mastodon user tell if their account is "hidden" or "limited" ?
-
How can a mastodon user tell if their account is "hidden" or "limited" ?
I see this a lot with accounts I want to follow.
1. Can admins do this without notifying the user?
2. Is it possible to see the reason accounts have been censored?
If the answers to any of these two questions is "no" then it seems mastodon is subject to abuse from biased/rogue admins and moderators.
cc @FediTips
#mastodon #censorship #fediverse #fedihelp
Each admin is responsible for what goes on on their server, they are paying for it and keeping it alive. It is entirely their prerogative who they block or limit. People who disagree are free to move their accounts to other servers or set up their own.
If you think you've been blocked or limited unfairly, you can email the server admin using the contact email on their server's About page (for example your server's admin email is listed at https://mastodon.social/about ).
-
Each admin is responsible for what goes on on their server, they are paying for it and keeping it alive. It is entirely their prerogative who they block or limit. People who disagree are free to move their accounts to other servers or set up their own.
If you think you've been blocked or limited unfairly, you can email the server admin using the contact email on their server's About page (for example your server's admin email is listed at https://mastodon.social/about ).
but they don't reply
and also "go find another server" is like "this restaurant is racist? go elsewhere". it puts the onus on the victim not the perpetrator
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
The email notification is only if it's your own server admin limiting/suspending your account.
Blocks from other servers do not generate any emails.
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
The email notification is only if it's your own server admin limiting/suspending your account.
Blocks from other servers do not generate any emails.
my own admin on a previous server mstdn.social suspended me with no warning, no explanation
and no replies to emails
and no replies to GDPR requests
who holds the admins to account?
-
but they don't reply
and also "go find another server" is like "this restaurant is racist? go elsewhere". it puts the onus on the victim not the perpetrator
Most accounts that are blocked are things like spambots, trolls, scammers etc. If admins were unable to block accounts against their will, the entire network would become toxic and unusable for everyone.
It's up to each admin to decide what is acceptable on their server, and users can decide which server to join based on what is acceptable there.
Being blocked doesn't make you a victim, it just means that that particular server doesn't want to communicate with you.
-
Most accounts that are blocked are things like spambots, trolls, scammers etc. If admins were unable to block accounts against their will, the entire network would become toxic and unusable for everyone.
It's up to each admin to decide what is acceptable on their server, and users can decide which server to join based on what is acceptable there.
Being blocked doesn't make you a victim, it just means that that particular server doesn't want to communicate with you.
I'm not communicating with that server. I communicated with people I followed and who followed me.
Your privileged rationalisation of victimhood will age badly.
What I'm hearing is that there is zero mechanism for holding admins/owners to account. How convenient.
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
I am not a lawyer so I cannot comment on GDPR requests.
Admins are held to account by other admins, rogue servers that behave badly tend to get defederated and isolated. For example when the far right server Gab tried to join the Fedi, servers mostly defederated it.
Each server is independent by design, there is no central authority imposing a particular set of rules. A central authority would bring its own dangers of Musk etc taking over such an authority.
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
I am not a lawyer so I cannot comment on GDPR requests.
Admins are held to account by other admins, rogue servers that behave badly tend to get defederated and isolated. For example when the far right server Gab tried to join the Fedi, servers mostly defederated it.
Each server is independent by design, there is no central authority imposing a particular set of rules. A central authority would bring its own dangers of Musk etc taking over such an authority.
have you not noticed how un-diverse mastodon is?
have you not questioned why?
a bunch of self-regulating bros? what could possibly be wrong with that?
-
Who are you suggesting should regulate it? Elon Musk? Mark Zuckerberg? Donald Trump?
Every time there has been a centralised authority running a social network, it has ended up in the hands of billionaires that support hatred.
The idea of this place is to give the grassroots control of their social networks. If you would prefer social networks to be corporate, there are already plenty of corporate options.
-
I'm not communicating with that server. I communicated with people I followed and who followed me.
Your privileged rationalisation of victimhood will age badly.
What I'm hearing is that there is zero mechanism for holding admins/owners to account. How convenient.
I'm not completely clear how an account being limited is victimhood?
What are you suggesting social networks should do instead, not limit accounts at all?
-
I should have looked at this profile before interacting with an antisemite. Bye.
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
The lack of diversity on here is a serious problem but it's not going to be solved by allowing everyone to post whatever they want without ever limiting or blocking anyone.
There needs to be MORE moderation on here, not less. People need to be protected from hatred, not exposed to it.
We need more tools like reply controls and automatic alerts for moderators when bad keywords are used.
No one should be seeing hatred in their feeds due to lax moderation.
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
The lack of diversity on here is a serious problem but it's not going to be solved by allowing everyone to post whatever they want without ever limiting or blocking anyone.
There needs to be MORE moderation on here, not less. People need to be protected from hatred, not exposed to it.
We need more tools like reply controls and automatic alerts for moderators when bad keywords are used.
No one should be seeing hatred in their feeds due to lax moderation.
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
I follow a lot of people critical of the Fediverse on my personal account to keep tabs on how bad the problem is and what exactly is going wrong.
The main issue raised is too many purveyors of hatred being allowed to attack members of minorities. Allowing hate puts people off staying here, accounts posting hate need to be banned.
If you removed all limits on what accounts could say and do, it would make the situation much worse.
-
Who are you suggesting should regulate it? Elon Musk? Mark Zuckerberg? Donald Trump?
Every time there has been a centralised authority running a social network, it has ended up in the hands of billionaires that support hatred.
The idea of this place is to give the grassroots control of their social networks. If you would prefer social networks to be corporate, there are already plenty of corporate options.
you show a lack of imagination
many people have suggested ideas such as
* mandatory transparency to ensure rogue admins are held to account
* public statstistics on admin behaviour incl GDPR complaince
* users having a right to a second binding opinion
* voting in supervisory groups / committees to balance rogue admins
* ... etc etc
but the aristocracy always ignore such ideas
the fediverse conferences as a result are very much self-congratulatory
-
I'm not completely clear how an account being limited is victimhood?
What are you suggesting social networks should do instead, not limit accounts at all?
you've shown a poor level of maturity (like some mastodon admins) and I can't make you understand
but this conversation will perhaps highlight to others what the issue is
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
The lack of diversity on here is a serious problem but it's not going to be solved by allowing everyone to post whatever they want without ever limiting or blocking anyone.
There needs to be MORE moderation on here, not less. People need to be protected from hatred, not exposed to it.
We need more tools like reply controls and automatic alerts for moderators when bad keywords are used.
No one should be seeing hatred in their feeds due to lax moderation.
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @footils
I follow a lot of people critical of the Fediverse on my personal account to keep tabs on how bad the problem is and what exactly is going wrong.
The main issue raised is too many purveyors of hatred being allowed to attack members of minorities. Allowing hate puts people off staying here, accounts posting hate need to be banned.
If you removed all limits on what accounts could say and do, it would make the situation much worse.
im a minority
im telling you that the problem is not "hate" but censorship by biased European admins
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @FediTips @footils how do you get the idea mastodon is "un-diverse"? any example of some sort of social network that is more diverse?
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @FediTips @footils how do you get the idea mastodon is "un-diverse"? any example of some sort of social network that is more diverse?
-
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topicR relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
