1y ago

The Lemmy.World Terms of Service now in effect

legal.lemmy.world

Hello World!

We've made some changes today, and we'd like to announce that our Code of Conduct is no longer in effect. We now have a new Terms of Service, in effect starting from today(October 19, 2023).

The "LAST REVISION DATE:" on the page also signifies when the page was last edited, and it is updated automatically. Details of specific edits may be viewed by following the "Page History" reference at the bottom of the page. All significant edits will also be announced to our users.

The new Terms of Service can be found at https://legal.lemmy.world/

In this post our community mods and users may express their questions, concerns, requests and issues regarding the Terms of Service, and content moderation in Lemmy.World. We hope to discuss and inform constructively and in good faith.

276 comments

I think that community guidelines/ code or conduct should still exist at a top level, in a digestible form, and not nested within a legal document.
They can still be part of the legal document, but should be made more accessible if said guidelines are cared about.
Otherwise you'll find that it's a set of expectations that no one reads (And likely cannot find even if they where looking for them), when those expectations are critically important to community health.

deleted by creator
- The best way to fuck a democratic process up is making votes public. No one should feel like there's a "deterrent" to voting. All that does is create incentive to reward/punish people for how they vote.
  Voting is what fuels the content aggregation, too. It is a very bad idea to deter people from voting how they please because it strangles the algorithm of the data it needs to sort the content. You want people voting, a lot. That's what makes the whole thing work.
  Edit: which is to say nothing of how bad it will get when people make tools that help automate retaliation for downvotes. You can potentially state an opinion in a comment and set up a bot to auto block every downvoter, then share that list publicly. You may think that sounds like a great system for weeding out hate but I promise you it's going to be far messier than that, and more importantly, this kind of retaliatory shit hurts the aggregation even more.
  
  Votes on lemmy are inherently public, due to how federation works.
  
  Votes are public on Lemmy, in the sense that if you have admin access to an instance that is federated you will be able to find who upvoted which posts/comments in the database.
  
  Since upvoting is most of what I do, I think it's great that people can see it was me who upvoted them.
  I don't mind the accountability of a downvote at all. If I didn't craft a specific reply, it lets people know who to ask if they genuinely don't understand why their content was problematic.
  
  You can potentially state an opinion in a comment and set up a bot to auto block every downvoter, then share that list publicly.
  Shhh dont give them ideas
  
  No one should feel like there’s a “deterrent” to voting.
  . . . It is a very bad idea to deter people from voting
  You misread. What I wrote:
  deterrent against weaponizing downvotes
  Voting and weaponizing downvotes are two very different things.
  To be clear, I used the phrase "weaponizing downvotes" to paraphrase the intent behind the written policy I quoted in full. Here it is again:
  Do not engage in content manipulation such as posting spam content, vote manipulation through using several user accounts or consistently down-voting a user. Vote for the content, not for the person.
  Seems like you have a problem with the policy then, because it is requiring you to self-regulate your own voting, and to specifically NOT vote as you please, but in a way that is best for the community as a whole.
- I’ve had a user disagree with me and then go through my entire post history and downvote every single one of my comments. I don’t get why someone would do that but I can see why Lemmy.world would put it against their terms of service.
  
  I get that all the time. It amused me greatly until the day I found out I can turn off the Fantasy Internet Points entirely. Now I have no idea if my votes are up or down or sideways.
  And I don't care.
  
  Why is it necessary to count votes cast an unlimited time after posting. The best policy is to register votes in the UI for the user but silently ignore votes after max duration. So they can feel like they stuck it to you while not having an unreasonable effect. You could even detect and silently discard downvotes that matched that pattern or rate limit the downvotes against one party silently.
  
  “Not my previous updoots😭”
  
  It happened to me, and it was the She-Ra fans who did it. They were angry that I called them monarchists.
- proofs of idiocy and/or bad faith they offer
  Then a downvote is justified, same user or not.
- I think that if you access Lemmy via api, you can see who downvoted you specifically. I’d prefer it’d be turned off as I think people feel better about participation when they don’t have to go on the record to other users officially.
  
  Just for clarity: it's not viewable through the API. As others have said, you need to spin up an instance. In contrast to the API, this means it's not free (due to server hosting and domain name costs), and it's not necessarily easy (for the non-techies).
- If you were to turn that on for lemmy.world as well I think it would get you better voting behavior from users all around.
  I don't think so. I think the more likely scenario is this would lead to people weaponizing other's downvote history, and then very quickly people would stop downvoting completely. You'd have less downvotes overall, which is not always a good thing. At that point they should just remove the ability to downvote altogether, they'll be accomplishing the same thing.
- If you were to turn that on for lemmy.world as well I think it would get you better voting behavior from users all around.
  Is it possible on Lemmy interface ? I thought that data required to have a look at the database
  
  Not through the Lemmy webUI, but if you spin up an instance and subscribe to communities, the posts and comments will start getting federated to your database.

5.0.6: No visual content depicting executions, murder, suicide, dismemberment, visible innards, excessive gore, or charred bodies. No content depicting, promoting or enabling animal abuse.
This rule needs an exception for war reporting, and posting evidence of criminal activity or police misconduct.
- Not just war reporting. There are legitmate medical discussions that can be aided by such depictions. There should be an exception made for legitimate educational images. Otherwise technically a biological textbook on dissection runs afoul of this rule.
  
  I second this. Educational content should be an exception.
- And hobbyist
- Not really tbh. We don't need to personally see that stuff — it can cause lasting trauma. Knowing it exists and who did it is enough for war reporting.
  
  Citizens of free and democratic societies have a fundamental need to be informed of what is going on in the world and their communities, free of bias or censorship, so they can make informed, reality based decisions and instruct their representatives in government on how to carry out the will of the people. When you start filtering and curating peoples' perception of reality to fit an agenda or narrative you're talking away their agency (you tankies wouldn't understand what that word means), and interfering with their duties as a citizen.
  
  We don’t need to personally see that stuff
  I find it difficult to understand that something should be banned because some people "don't need" to see it. Then don't look at it? And I'm talking specifically for war reporting now. I'm not talking for generic gore. It is war reporting. It is something that happens. By hiding it it only helps to enlarge our safe bubble and live in it. Sorry, this is not the world. If you want to live in your safe bubble it is up to you, but making it sound like the "correct way to handle reality" is wrong imo
  
  I agree that it’s fine to make a rule against it on a privately funded instance but definitely do not agree with your line of thinking. Sometimes you can’t understand the gravity of horror without seeing it, and sometimes you must understand it to be motivated to do something about it. A little trauma of is sometimes necessary to be an informed citizen of the world.
  
  Good thing these people weren't on the internet in the early 2000's with sites like rotten.com or toxic.com. much simpler days
  
  You so cute
  
  then don't look at it
  
  Yes we do. Gore and mutilation are part of life. It should be shown on public television and kid's shows so maybe we can finally understand the consequences of senseless warfare in future generations.
- They aren't Reddit, they're an instance. There's no reason they need to allow that. That content can be for other instances.
  
  That is bad logic and no justification.
- That's what lemmy.ml is for. This instance is too big for its own good.

I like what I see. Everything looks like a set of conditions I can support. I am not sure about the gore part, but I can understand why people wouldn't want that can of worms.
4.1: No one under 16 years of age is allowed to use or access the website.
Someone's going to need a stretcher for the roblox mods.
- I'm not sure if I should be angry at yet another attempt to exclude young people when the internet is already practically the last refuge in which they are allowed to exist at all...
  ... or laugh my ass off that literally anyone thinks this rule will be obeyed.
  
  It’s about legal liability. The admins don’t want to have to worry about dealing with all sorts of EU and US regulation for minors so they can have an official policy that minors can’t use the site.
  Nobody really cares if kids participate but it’s not the admin’s responsibility to bend over backwards for regulations to accommodate them.
  
  Sir, I just need you to confirm you date of birth is indeed: Jan 01 1999
  But have no fear. It's not the rule people should worry about, its the punishment!
  Clause 66, section 6: All ages 16 of less will be sentenced to 15 days in the meme mines. And possibly made mandatory mod of Boomer Memes for an hour. May the odds be ever in your favor.
  
  No one wants kids shitting things up dude
  
  Agreed but the puritans that have to give it up before we can expect sites like this to overexpose themselves to legal action.

I'd like to see rules for moderators, for instance they cannot ban users based on participation in other groups
- This was something that caught me off guard on Reddit. I saw some edgelord in the comments of a shitpost sub roleplaying as a third reich Nazi. I commented „Halt die Fresse.“ which is German for STFU. I immediately got banned from the main BLM sub.
  And it happened over and over again. Some Mods on Reddit are just full of themselves.
  
  In reddit I questioned the logic of an anti-vax group and immediately got banned by about a dozen bots in other groups because I had commented in a "forbidden" group. There was no attention paid to the content of the comment. So much for reddit being a forum for discussion.
  If you can't moderate a group without using ban bots then you shouldn't be moderating.

5.0.4: Do not post illegal content of any type. Do not engage in any activity that may encourage, facilitate or provide access to illegal transactions. Do not share or encourage the sharing of abusive or sexually suggestive content involving minors. Any violent or otherwise inappropriate behavior involving a minor will also always be strictly prohibited.
5.0.4 seems to be in conflict with the existence of !piracy. I'm not complaining about its existence, just mentioning that it seems to be a conflict.
- "Illegal content of any type" is an incredibly thorny concept. Illegal where? Where the poster is? Where lemmy.world is hosted? Within some nebulous consensus of Western nations? Only the US states that matter, excluding Wyoming and Montana?
  It's illegal to be gay in Saudi Arabia or Uganda. Is gay content not allowed? Switchblades are illegal in California but not in neighboring Oregon. Am I not allowed to talk about switchblades? It's illegal to export strong encryption technologies from the US. Am I not allowed to talk about encryption? Etc., etc., etc.
  
  It was quoted just a bit above you, dude:
  7.0: The website and the agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the Republic of Finland Suomen.
- I'd argue "transaction" implies an exchange... If you pirate content you either are giving something freely, and receiving nothing, or are receiving something while giving nothing.
  
  If you're not a leeching piece of shit (like I am) then technically torrenting IS a transaction
  
  What you argue is less relevant than the legal definition in the Netherlands.
- Those communities aren’t hosted on lemmy.world and therefore not subject to its terms.
  edit: if I’m not mistaken, those communities (or the instances they’re hosted on) have been banned from lemmy.world, so if you’re logged in as a lemmy.world user, you cannot see them anyway.
  
  I think they were recently refederated.
- Does !piracy@lemmy.world exist? If it does I can't find it.
  
  Technically exists, but has been inactive for months. The active piracy communities are !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com and !piracy@lemmy.ml - neither of which are hosted by lemmy.world.
  
  Yes, it does. Click that link again now.
- in my country only uploading is illegal, not downloading so not necessarily.
  
  What matters is the laws in the location of the server and/or the person who owns the domain and runs the site.
  And the terms explicitly state which location whose laws it believes they fall under:
  The website and the agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the Republic of Finland Suomen

Regarding Section 1.0, the portion “lemmy.world (“Lemmy.World,” “we,” “us,” or “LW”).” You may need to include the term “our” since it’s used quite frequently throughout the document.

trusting you to fairly enforce these rules since they are beyond my willingness to parse. IANAL That said, golden rule always applies. If a suspension or ban is warranted, please require a clear reference to the violation so behavior can be modified in the future. Hate getting banned with no reason or hope of avoiding future violations.
- In this regard, this is pretty damning: https://kbin.social/m/RedditMigration/t/554307/Just-wanted-a-warning-Lemmy-World-is-perhaps-worse-than-reddit
  Also, adding having to agree to the Terms of Service when a new user creates an account is good, but does nothing when they create the user from another instance. Lemmy instances that want to implement this might want to consider forcing users coming from other instances to have to agree to general Terms of Service before they can fully participate.
  
  That thread filled with people who got banned from Lemmy World. You think everyone there is arguing in good faith?
  And some of the reactions to the new ToS have been quite aggressive towards the admin team, even though there is nothing there that changed how people can use our site. Be a decent person and you are welcome, that is the document's purpose.
  We had reactions telling us "fuck off corporate shills" and "suck my balls" and publicly stating they will be a problem and then it's Shocked Pikachu when they get banned and start threads everywhere.
  As you pointed out, people who sign up on Lemmy World have to agree to these terms by typing "I agree" in the sign-up form. We're looking into other options for existing users.
- You anal?
  
  am not a lawyer
  
  We.

This seems to bring LW closer to Reddit. /s
But seriously, what is the point of all of this? It only seems to overcomplicate things. Now a user will have to:
Follow the ToS
Follow the CoC
Follow whatever rules a community's sidebar states
Match whichever mod's interpretation of all the above
In that order, or any other order? I see nothing about protesting the breach of the ToS by either the CoC or some community, or some community's mod... so which supersedes which?
How is this going to be communicated to users commenting/posting from other instances? Or is this only applicable to users registered on this instance? In which case, what is going to be applicable to federated users?
What are the user's rights?
Users Responsibilities: 4.x
Our Rights: 6.x
Users Rights: none?
If you want to establish this as a legal document, then you're missing at least a section.
If this is about giving as many reasons as possible to remove/ban content/users, it's all unnecessary, just say "mods can remove/ban whatever"; it's a private instance, you can do that.
If this is about having a ruleset that protects the users from arbitrary mod decisions... I see none of that in there.
- Ultimately it's just "we're gonna act like how reddit admins act".
- Simplified version: Dont be an asshole.
  FIN
- Using a free service is not a right, it's a privilege. Which can be revoked at any time for any reason. Grow up.

You really expect me, your average idiot, to read a legal document to learn the rules and abide by them?
- It’s not hard to read and it’s pretty clear. IMHO it’s better than most ELUA text I’ve seen.
  Besides with the scale at which this site is growing it would be STUPID of them NOT to put up something like this. At the bare minimum it’s protecting their asses from liability if/when someone decides to sue them. They can’t point to that text and say this is what/why we took the actions we did.
- I trust in the Golden Rule, and my behavior within carries me to victory!
  I trust that the Golden Rule will be "enough the same" - compared to the given rules here - so that I will not break any rules!
  
  Yes! Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe, the more often and steadily we reflect upon them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me.

Thanks for being upfront and clear about things. I know it’s not easy.
If you don’t have anyone on the team who has great soft skills I’d suggest you put out a call for “community managers.” Mostly for things like this.
Keep up the great work! I’m glad to see how everything is coming together. 🍻
- Thank you! But funny you bring this up..
  Because that's exactly what we are working on. Community Management and Engagement Management teams are being formed. Community managers will be checking up on moderation and are about keeping communities healthy. Community Engagement team will be responsible to help provide content, putting community's in the spotlight and more.
  Formation of these teams is ongoing, if anyone reads this and is interested contact me or @clueless_stoner@lemmy.world
  Anyway, more on that in a different thread soon!
  
  Oh, does that mean there will be a place to appeal moderation? The only issue I've had so far is on lemmy.ml, but it'd be nice to know there's some recourse to mods pushing an agenda or propaganda.

7.0: The website and the agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the Republic of Finland Suomen.
oh ok, some operational details make more sense now

How does a TOS work with federation??? I have no intention of breaking rules to be clear, and I assume if I did I would just get banned? I'm just curious what the legal implications are.
I can see and interact with content on lemmy.world without ever visiting it, which feels like a grey area on the "accessing or using" part right at the beginning of the TOS. Maybe include a definition for what "accessing" is and can include in the context of the fediverse?
Then again it might not matter, idk.
- The without ever visiting is the grey area. Federated instances provide the interface to the underlying instances, so yeah you kind of are "visiting" it if you interact. But you're right, the mods of any given instance that host the content source get to decide what happens after the fact.
  
  But the other federated instance is essentially mirroring it. Another instances users are not using Lemmy.world directly, they are viewing mirrored content, and then if they reply, they are doing it elsewhere, and it is getting passed on to L.W.
  How was this handled for Usenet? I think it was just assumed that if you were propagating Usenet Content, you knew that implied diversity positive and negative.
  
  IANAL, but probably not, any more than reading and sending email on Gmail visits Hotmail or Proton or has to follow their terms of service. I'm using sopuli.xyz, all the content I interact comes from and goes to there, what it and lemmy.world do after that doesn't have anything to do with me.

I assume the privacy policy is under construction?
- Correct! It is still in the works and will be coming out in the future.

#todo: Privacy policy
- Feels kind of wrong that that isn't done in tandem with this.

In miscellaneous:
In this event, the laws applicable to us, which were mentioned in Section 12
Which section is this referring to exactly?
Not on the same page?

The website and the agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the Republic of Finland Suomen.
Where are you guys based? Ultimately there is only one legal jurisdiction that applies here
- The domain is registered in Netherlands, but all the server IPs seem to be located in the US. Not that IP localization is always accurate (I'm actually not sure how it works at all)
  
  Could be Cloudflare?
- Thank you for asking this, the part about users not using LW for illegal activities is also unclear to me, is it an illegal activity in my country where I'm posting from, or an illegal activity where LW is registered. For example, being gay might be illegal where I live, it won't stop me accessing queer communities online.
  That's an obvious situation for me, because it's such an unjust law, but a more vague example might be an 18 year old in the USA and and 18 year old in Australia discussing the consumption of alcohol and how to make homebrew. One of those people are breaking local laws. In the grand scheme of things this is a relatively harmless situation, but would this technology be a violation of the T&S?

Minor correction, “4.0.3” is used twice:
4.0.3: You are responsible for your own experience on the website. While we are looking to provide an entertaining platform, we are not responsible for your individual experience. 4.0.3: The reporting function may not be used without good reason. Only report content that violates the rules defined in the Terms of Service, or content that violates the rules of the community it was posted to. Personal messages may be reported if they violate any of the terms defined in this document. User profiles may be reported by messaging any of the admins listed in the website’s sidebar, or by sending an e-mail to info@lemmy.world.

5.0: Lemmy.World consists of a large number of communities from all around the world, leading our federated network.
This sentence is a little unclear to a native speaker. Maybe change "leading" to "constituting".
I also suggest that maybe an extra clause could be added to pick up CP related content that may not be illegal, such as drawings, hentai and AI generated content that depicts minors involved in sexual or other inappropriate acts. It doesn't quite fit into 5.04 as it may not necessarily be illegal (IDK) , or 5.06 as it may not necessarily involve gore or violence.
- I also suggest that maybe an extra clause could be added to pick up CP related content that may not be illegal, such as drawings, hentai and AI generated content that depicts minors involved in sexual or other inappropriate acts.
  Well good luck in defining what constitutes “a minor” in a drawing.
  I think it’s fine like this, most openly loli/shota-friendly instances are defederated anyway, I don’t think the “gray area” where most hentai falls is bothering anyone.
  
  It’s not about defining it, it’s about giving yourself a pre communicated basis to remove content that may be disagreeable but not strictly illegal.

Is commercial splatter horror fine? What about a bit of good old eldrich horror?

I see you removed the rules against transphobia and clarified that content can't be reported if it's not against the new rules. That sucks
- Should there also be entries to cover Ginger, Blonde, Black, or a million other specific labels which could be targeted?
  Isn't singling out Transphobia a form of predjudice? Shouild we also add to the list a few thousand other terms which some people find 'edgy'?
  
  There are very obviously groups of people who are targeted for violence, threats, harassment and abuse based solely on who they are. Ginger, blonde and black haired people don't experience this.
  By making it explicit in a ToS or set of rules that attacking these groups of people is against the rules, the Admins could've made those users feel just a little bit safer and welcome on their server. Removing those explicit rules makes them, by contrast, feel unsafer and less welcome. That's one of things .world admin team have achieved with this change.
  
  Should there also be entries to cover ... a million other specific labels
  Is there significant and active discrimination happening to those "millions" of other specific labels where people show up dead on the news in the majority of countries and that exhibit targeted hatred online? Can you point out a single example for a ginger or a blonde being killed because of the color of their hair? Are there statistics about this from various countries?
  singling out Transphobia a form of predjudice
  No, that's very disingenuous and sounds like rhetoric someone would use to ease up the rules about transphobia. I'd argue that what you're doing is a form of semantic manipulation.

I hope this is better than reddit😅
- Your post has been removed by Reddit.
  Reason: threatening violence
- Your first post and already 5 upvotes.

Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Did you use the mastodon.world Terms of service as a base?

No problem. 👍

Do not engage in content manipulation such as posting spam content, vote manipulation through using several user accounts or consistently down-voting a user. Vote for the content, not for the person.
I think all of the different front ends that exist for Lemmy should also take the approach that they don't display up/downvote buttons on user pages. Is there any way to make this a by-default thing for old.lemmy, etc?
- Currently Lemmy UI doesn't have that capability however Kbin shows who upvoted. You can also see the number of up/down votes a post has through certain apps such as Memmy.
- Vote manipulation will be tricky to enforce, since votes can come from any Instance due to the whole federation thing, if the user uses the same username on their account it's easy but if not it can be very difficult if not impossible.
  
  "vote manipulation" is not a real thing on the internet. Nobody is being elected to a position of power. Ergo the conditions required for the word to apply do not exist. The reason is not there. Having your post at the top of a web page for an hour is not equivalent to four years of direct influence upon policy.
  Concluding that a couple extra updoots on a post merits deletion of someone's identity is more obviously bad behaviour than the problem it attempts to address, which is no problem at all.
  Why are we copycatting the place everyone is trying to get away from?

How many people were in charge of writing this, and manage Lemmy.world more generally?

4.0.1: You were not permanently banished from the website in the past.
Doesn't this imply that only having a temporary ban allows you to keep going on some other account? Seems like quite the loophole.
- Idk, it seems pretty clear.
  If you got a permaban then you’re not welcome.
  The world temporary isn’t used there. There would be nothing to stop someone from just making a new account in either case. But if it were obvious someone was trying to get around that clause then it would be more than enough of a reason to swing the ban hammer.

I don't think a TTL of 5 minutes is typical, also, if the servers are all located in the US, wouldn't US law apply?

literally (jokingly) 1984
- Literally 1984

joke's on you. i can't read

😜

Is there any chance of going back to pure and enlightened Anarchism?
- Lots of people think anarchy is what they want, until they get it.
  
  no rules sounds pretty good, maybe there's even an instance for it. but i guarantee that there will be a LOT of nazis and queerphobes. and that's not why i am here.
  
  Not to put your point down, but to enritch it.
  people have longed for X utopia, but when people get it its a distopian hellscape.
  This phrase was said about ideologies like capitolism, communism, liberalism, conservitism, anarchism (like tou did) and likely more.
  each time I pose a question, was the pure vision an evil one, or did it get twisted apon or after implementation
  
  Community is vital for anarchy to work. It's hard to do that in an open online community tbh.
  
  Sure seems like a lazy way to dismiss the argument, just saying that he actually doesn't know what he wants.

Love it, glad to be here on .World.

Lemmy.world getting increasingly like Beehaw on steroids. Ironically, for their anti-authoritarian editorial policies, they're increasingly stomping down what is and isn't acceptable. Most people who like to be treated like adults fortunately have lemm.ee or Lemmy.ml
Signed, former Lemmy.world resident
- Tell me you didn't read the TOS without telling me you didn't read the TOS.
  Whats your complaint? You can't:
  Harass others
  Post sexual abuse fantasy/reality
  Post murder/gore
  Act like an infant and down vote all content of another lemming
  Can you specify which of the above you take issue with? If I missed something in the TOS that you're taking issue with, I'm curious what it is.
  Otherwise I think you're lost and looking for a different thread.
  
  My response was here: https://lemm.ee/comment/5092425
  I'll save retyping.
- You know you can search for your username and see all your accounts right? Your Lemmy.World one is far from the most active.
  Yes most people want to be treated like adults and there is nothing in the ToS that prevents them from doing so. Which of the terms do you have a problem with?
  
  Firstly, I have more than one account for different purposes. These were created when performance problems were rampant, and my view was always to return, and then the Hexbear defederation happened before even federation occurred based on speculation. It was much quicker than Exploding Heads defederation was. Based on that decision and the way it was worded in the announcement, which failed to be impartial, detached, or hiding in personal intent, I was hesitant to return fully. See the lemm.ee announcement taken for contrast which was done by someone with more than enough reason to defederate, but they approached it in a balanced and mature manner. In line with that, this can become quite sinister:
  "Always post compliant content that upholds the rules of the individual community and the website, and is of personal interest to you."
  "uphold the rules of the website" and ensure posts are "compliant". It very much comes across as though world is a political site, and has taken a clear editorial line. Anyone from the left isn't welcome... and steps will be taken if it makes anyone feel any cognitive dissonance. lemmy.ml, lemm.ee and shit.just.works are far superior general purpose instances.
  Interestingly enough, you have the following:
  "Vote for the content, not for the person."
  and yet you decided to search me, and go for the ad hominem. Playing the person and not the point. I'm getting the anyone that disagrees is a problem vibe here.
- who asked nerd
- Ok
- Ok
- Ok

5.1: The content provided on Lemmy.World is not necessarily factually true, and hosting it does not mean agreeing, supporting or encouraging it. We only require all content fully comply with the Terms of Service and any other documents that are mentioned and linked to in this document.
So Lemmy.world is just as good as Lemmy.ml & Lemmygrad etc?
- Just that lemmy.world can't have a team of full time fact checkers, so we have to be adults and do our own research.
  
  That sounds more like a cop out though. Like not having to moderate blatant disinformation, which is exactly what happens on the mentioned instances.

You got terms of service, now. Looks sketchy. The yee old code of conduct was a good way to go. This here is a terms of service. The kind you click on to agree to most of the time. So sketchy it makes me think oh yeah, I haven’t agreed to them yet. Never going to. At least for noe I can say no and continue onward. You really want to enslave me but I’m not going to be your slave. Your terms of service can suck my balls.
- enslavement?
  
  bruh really forgot that there's other instances
- My god just go to 4chan and disappear from this site please.

As I said before, lemmy.world is now a corporate whore. They deleted my account instantly when I said so from my lemmy.world account. Now I can say so and it’s more difficult. Go suck my balls, lemmy world. Having a code of conduct was good. Having a terms of service is corporate shill terrritory and you’ll suck my balls forever.
- They deleted your account because you said you were going to cause trouble for them.
  Man, can you believe I got expelled for spitting in the dean's face and threatening to wreck the place??
  Well, yeah..
  What did you expect to happen? Maybe you should read the terms again haha.
  
  "Damn fascists!"
- you seem like a reasonable person
- lol or…or…they aren’t corporate since none of this is profitable, and you’re just an asshole
- People like you are why Lemmy will never take off. Take your meds.
  
  If this is what it turns into, i hope it never takes off

276 comments