/0

Thanks for the question. The ban also applies to other Xitter-owned domains such as their photo blobstore (pbs) domain.

Home instance users voted 93% in favor of the proposal (284/307)

Donating and vouched for users voted 100% in favor of the proposal (20/20 votes).

At least we know in this poll it is 3.07 instance users votes (1/100 non-supporting, non-vouched and non-mvp users, cannot exceed +/- 10) vs 20 donated/vouched users votes. This is definitely a fair way to poll.

It reaffirms my decision both to migrate here for my home instance and to start donating when I did.

Beautiful.

anarchy brother. we self select pretty hard.

This is the best place to be.

I think they could be summarized as:

• Opposition to any form of censorship and/or concerns about "slippery slope" of banning Xitter links - i.e., what about Meta links?
• It's important to be able to post newsworthy tweets in order to hold them to account and have a record.
• Concerns about fact-checking - i.e., how can we check veracity of Twitter links if all we have is screenshots?
• Some folks wanted to ban all Xitter links, including screen shots and xcancel links, for a complete blackout.

We've tried our best to address those concerns in the policy above, which is a bit of a compromise position that tries to take as many of these concerns into account as we reasonably could. But of course some are mutually exclusive positions, so it's not going to satisfy 100% of users.

The only people I saw saying no seemed to be saying it because "you should always link to the source so people can find it", which was rightfully called out for being incredibly silly given we're talking about tweets here

I was against it because I wanted to do screenshots or alternative front ends for any twitter links. You should also be able to provide an original source for a tweet, like an archive link. I didn't comment because I knew my opinion/vote on this didn't matter. Not only do the majority hate twitter (with little interest in fact-checking tweets), but I also don't donate and saw that my 1 non-donation vote equates to nothing in the comments of that thread. Now the only thing users can do is screenshots, which is pretty disappointing. This and another big mod reason is making me so disillusioned with this instance.

We had a total of 7 "vouched" for users (you can see this by hovering over the icons). Once a user has been vouched for, then they can participate in all votes unless that privilege is subsequently withdrawn.

American Idiot comes to mind.

I think our preference would be to stick to xcancel.com links if you need to link for factchecking. I hadn't given much consideration to archive links though, to be honest. I'd be interested to know your thoughts on those, and I'll review the comments again on that topic. We can always tweak the policy if need be.

On the server instance level, or the user application level?

On the server instance level, I can see if being an issue if it extends to other redirects, and lead to malicious abuse by the instance.

On the user application level, would be valuable. I use Lemmy Sync and it'll be a nice feature to suggest.

Hi fuckwit_mcbumble lol,

We are still configuring the threativore automod settings. Initially we will set it to autoreport any suspected violations for human review. Once we have confirmed it is working as expected then it will auto-remove the post or comment with a specific modlog reason to explain the policy.