/0 Governance

Acknowledged governance topic opened by https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/u/flatworm7591

This is a simple majority vote. The current tally is as follows:

• For:
• Against:
• Local Community: +0.1
• Outsider sentiment: Sympathetic
• Total: +3.1
• Percentage: 72.00%

This vote will complete in 6 days

I am indifferent.

On the one hand, most of their behavior deserves a community ban for sure. But I don’t know that I agree it deserves defederation.

That said, if the claims of intentional brigading and DM harassment are true, I’d lean more towards defederation.

I don't have much experience with Grail, I used to and still do cite a few articles They've written (Their Agender article is a good one). Though from my personal experiences with Them and how I've seen Them act towards I do think they are a troll, or at the very least extremely adversarial.

I have had many experiences with dragonfucker, and those were insanely bad. dragonfucker literally harassed me multiple times with alts, created communities dedicated to trolling me, because I and others banned them for trolling. I don't know if Grail is the same person. I personally don't think so since They have had a presence on the internet long before dragonfucker. That doesn't mean Grail isn't an alt of dragonfucker or vice versa. I cannot say that for sure, but if They were and there's good evidence for it I feel like this shouldn't even be a vote since we don't do votes for banning trolls or ban evaders.

All that said I'm still in favor of defederation because Grail's instance and views go against our community's values. From what I've seen recently They've been acting like an insane shitlib troll. I feel bad because I've read the stuff They wrote and thought They were probably a very smart and very respectable person. I guess that's why they say you should never meet your heroes.

I blocked that whole instance shortly after the "Banned for Nuttin'" post in YPTB last week. defederating from anarchist comms because of not liking the content, listing the reason as "authoritarianism", then complaining when that mod issues a reciprocal ban is some pretty shitty behavior. but then, so is the constant badjacketing and insistence that only one kind of anarchism is the "right" one. I vote for FOR defederating.

Without solid proof that the new instance admin is actually the same person, I would be very hesitant to defederate based on the behavior of the older accounts and the conjecture that the accounts are owned by the same person.

Meaning, defederation should be based solely on the current account's behavior. I don't think I've encountered this account, and I don't especially feel like going digging. But if there have been reports flowing in, and the content reported justifies instance defederation, then it should be defederated.

I haven't seen it myself, and since I don't really have time to do digging right now, I'll abstain from the vote.

If someone is annoying/frustrating and trolling you, then they are also causing those same disturbances to others such as your users. It is why I ban trolls that are negatively affecting others and do not align with dbzer0. Granted, most of my bans are bots. Grail was annoying for sure and I stopped replying to this user because I didn't want to get banned after seeing others mixing up the capitals. Yes, I struggled at first before realizing blahaj was right about this.

Once Grail started comparing veganism with AI, I felt the troll became more obvious, too obvious. The suffering and deaths of real animals is not comparable to so called 'AI slavery'. This 'AI' is just a LLM spitting random auto-complete with no consciousness. I don't ask that our users become vegan, but to troll vegans and parrot antiveganism is just trolling leftists for no real reason (the hex was based yet again). I don't lose sleep over banning these trolls, YDM imo.

I'm not sure if drag is Grail, I know drone rights was also PM_ME_FAT_ENBIES, but I could not tell for certain that Grail is drone rights (although they shared similarities for sure just like the other 2 you also listed). I also remember MindTraveler, what a fun (/s) person who was always angrily telling off people that Grail didn't like.

Grail is neurodivergent (trans and NPD afaik), so we should be willing to make some accommodations for Their behaviour

Lame copout. They troll and know what They're doing.

Edited for grammar and info

I've interacted with this person. I believe you even screenshotted conversation snippets I was involved either before or after in that thread. They are not capable of discourse.

Grail is neurodivergent (trans and NPD afaik), so we should be willing to make some accommodations for Their behaviour

As someone once told me, bad behavior is not excused by status (I'm paraphrasing the condition slightly). You have to own your actions and words on some level.

I've not had the pleasure of dealing with Them.

From the discussion here.. They can fuck off.

Let's defed and be done with it.

Thanks for the heads up. I blocked their instance on my client. Due to my extensive blocks and filters, I have never interacted with their posts or comments as far as I know. I vote no, because content engagement and filtering should always be a user choice. If you personally don’t like them, block the user(s). Block me if you want. It’s your choice.

• Grail is neurodivergent (trans and NPD afaik), so we should be willing to make some accommodations for Their behaviour

It is an insult to every neurodivergent person who has their shit together, if you tolerate this sort of behavior just because they are “different”.

No tolerance for the intolerant. Defederate.

Flatwork7591: thank you very much for this very informative post and giving us the possibility to be heard.

Grail is nowhere near as annoying as Drag imho. However generally I really dislike sockjacketing people without solid evidence, like this. OTOH I do understand that trolls need to be dealt with summarily so avoid more damage to the communities. I just feel we don't need to try to connect them to previous trolls to do so.

I'm going to abstain from this one as I am not particularly bothered either way.

Disagree/remain federated.

One, it seems like They dislike our instance. Let Them defederate on their end if They have a problem.

Two, They are weird but other than not liking (some of) us, I think They're fine. They have strong opinions but I don't dislike Them. I can also forgive quite a lot. I'm used to seeing differing opinions online. It doesn't bother me. I've had vitriol thrown my way online for over 30 years for just standing for something. I've gotten used to it. Sure, there are some dangerous opinions out there, but we don't have to let them ruin our day. I understand if some people want to defederate with this individual — I'm not sure if capitalisation is needed there, sorry — but they can also block Them.

Anecdotal, but I recall having a conversation with Grail about Their pronouns, but it wasn't about the pronouns themselves, it was about Their difficulty in getting them to show up. I think that was that person. Anyway, I thought it was odd that They want to use capitalised pronouns, and had a few thoughts about that which are not relevant, but ultimately I thought They were alright.

I've blocked users who annoy me. I could tell you why, but my reasons are my own and I wouldn't expect others to agree with me.

I disagree with defederation, but I'm not opposed. Because, like I have reasons that are personal to me, db0 and other users have reasons that are personal to them. So I do appreciate it being put to a vote. That's the right way to do it. But, I vote no. However, I have no petition for anyone to vote either way.

On one hand, yeah they can be really annoying.

On the other, all they're pretty much doing is talking about their voodoo reality shit (which often can be really funny) and politics in a way that's not too different from .world'ers.

I did interact with this user directly and while my experience with them was negative, completely disappearing them for a wrong kind of LARP that's already prevalent in other instances and sometimes being annoying seems way too extreme.

No opinion on this question given it’s none of my business, but I love seeing these governance posts in action. I really admire the system you all have here and appreciate how level-headed they always seem to be rather than the lynch mob discussions like these have the potential to be

The only time I interacted with this user was when They went by the name of Drag. At the time, it was the 2024 US General Election, and They were a big pain in the ass. I might have blocked Them then and there because I don't recall seeing Them again on Lemmy, or any of Their aliases.

I have a brief snapshot of the user. They could be "normal" under any other context but politics, but I haven't seen it.

db0 has a clear charter that is fundamentally political in nature. I don't have any confidence that this user won't monolothize our instance and force things to be political, without giving any of our users the benefit of the doubt that they're their own individuals which happen to align on politics. And of course, we have to put in extra effort to accommodate Their neurodivergency - which isn't to say we shouldn't accommodate them. All genders deserve (digital) dignity, respect, and inclusion. Just because someone is divergent in their gender doesn't give them a blank check to withhold that same right to others. There is a social contract of tolerance here, regardless of the actors and however different those actors may be.

Another side of the conversation is what impact this person has on db0. If They're abusing their admin and mod powers on Their own instance, where people are free to post content according to the instance rules, what's to say that said content is given the same protections and said users are given the same rights and freedoms that we enjoy on db0? Is it within our power to protect those people from Drag or Grail or whichever name They go by? Are we the police of the Fediverse? I think db0 is the exact opposite. We allow freedom of thought, freedom of expression.

I guess the question is if this user and Their instance prevents db0 from carrying out that mission.

Still making up my mind myself!

Edit: I'm abstaining from this one until we have evidence that these users are one and the same identity (or system of identities like with Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) as others have pointed out). While single-admin users are suspect for the reasons people point out (e.g. users of their own instance can globally undo all bans on the Fediverse if they ban themselves on their own instance, then subsequently unban themselves), are there other instances out there that only have 1 admin and have a considerably large user base? I feel like we need to refine our rules regarding defederation for this reason or risk a larger exclusion from the wider Fediverse.

Also, getting back to impact, how much impact does Grail/Drag have on the Fediverse compared to the Zionist instance we defederated from the other month ago (we did defederate right?)? There being a place on the Fediverse where individuals of a similar immoral ideology culminate to organize and execute broad actions (e.g. brigade) is different than one individual (or system of individuals as is the case with DID) setting up their own instance to ban evade. Sure db0 users may want nothing to do with either case, but one problematic user can be managed by db0 users compared to organized communities of problematic users.

I mostly remember the controversy from the Exocrinus days and I am in support of defed. Cant believe this is getting hashed again.

Neurodivergence set aside, They are a terrible troll that never, ever argued in good faith on any topic I saw Them engage with, and was just a huge pain in the ass of normal users and mods alike. Use of a single-user instance without registration limits for the owner opens the door for infinite alt accounts that cannot be realistically banned or controlled using normal mod tools, without filtering the entire instance. And that seems to be the entire purpose of this new instance- ban evasion.

Also, as a neurodivergent myself, trying to lean on being different does NOT absolve a user of the consequences resulting from being a unrequited asshole trying to stir shit up. I'll respect Their pronouns for sure, but I'm still going to call Them a dick when They are being a dick. I understand needing to be diplomatic, Unruffled, but try not to carry too much water for the trolls.

Agreed with the case for this being more of a ban/block situation. If their establishment of an instance is used to evade bans and blocks, then defed.

Edit: due to this discussion here I am changing my vote to a yes

I have to veto this one. I honestly feel users can handle it. Especially since this seems to pertain to a single user. Defederation to me is absolutely last ditch absolutely no hope left measure and I don't feel this calls for it yet. I still see that user engaging in good faith and normal activities outside of politics comms so they seem to just be a lib.

I dislike Grail.

I dislike defederation more.

I dislike unsupported claims that multiple usernames are aliases of the same person even more.

I dislike the prospect of this instance moving into closer alignment with select other instances the most.

Against defed under the present circumstances.

Addendum: I do not agree that anyone else can compel my use of capital or lowercase.

My experience with Grail was that They publicly expressed intent to brigade mine and similar communities as well as encouraged others to do the same and then decided to troll me in my DMs after I banned Them for it. I've also noticed they consistently promote electoralism and also engage in some really bad faith arguments and accusations, like conflating usage of AI with enslaving animals, which is pretty gross.

Since they're the only admin on Their instance I say defederate, we would defederate if some other random troll was hosting their instance and violating our rules. It shouldn't be different if a person is a troll who is also trans or neurodivergent, I say that as someone who is trans-NonBinary and neurodivergent myself.

oh huh I didn't realize Grail was Drag but it tracks. i appreciated that Drag's pronouns made me think about pronouns in a way that they/them hasn't for a long time. that said, I can understand the people who felt it was "attack helicopter" adjacent (patently not the blatantly transphobic camp, and there were a lot of them)

I think They are harmless and defederating is too extreme. the crime of being annoying doesn't warrant excommunication, I think people can individually block if they find Them annoying (cool that Their pronouns make that sentence make sense in a way it wouldn't without the capitalization :P )

I think it would be reasonable to reassess this proposal if They started doing targeted harassment of our users or communities but I don't think They are.

also, I feel like a lot of the emotions involved here have more to do with the alts/priors than Grail Themself. have They specifically said anywhere that those are accounts They ran or is there some other definitive proof of those accounts all being the same person behind them?

I'm not doubting the connection, merely asking because if the accounts aren't definitely the same person I think that changes things

That's a yes from me. I would prefer some concrete evidence linking these accounts to confirm ban evasion, but that would require some collaboration between instance admins to basically dox the person.

The general antagonistic nature, purity testing, lack of demonstrating any principles of anarchism tell me that this person is out to do just what they are doing, and whatever sort of reports that have been sent will keep being sent.

We owe new users some sort of safety in the community. If we expect everyone to be fully informed and capable of discerning bad actors from ignorant ones, that's not fair to them.

One person's neurodivergence is also not an excuse to distress others. Allowing that robs other people who may also be vulnerable from feeling safe, and gives the first person power over these other people.