DRAFT piefed.social content policy / terms of service
UPDATE: the final (for now) version has been published at https://piefed.social/rules
Thanks for your contributions, everyone.
To maintain a safe, respectful, and fact-based community, the following types of content are prohibited on PieFed:
1. Harassment, Hate Speech, and Discrimination
- Do not post content that is racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist, or otherwise dehumanizing.
- This includes slurs, dog whistles, or content that promotes stereotypes or attacks individuals or protected groups based on identity or background.
2. Spam and Malicious Behavior
- No spamming, flooding, advertising, or self-promotion without permission.
- No scams, phishing attempts, or distribution of malware.
- No brigading, vote manipulation, or coordinated harassment.
3. Authoritarian and Fascist Propaganda
Content promoting fascist, ultranationalist, or authoritarian ideologies is not allowed, including things such as:
- Genocide denial or minimization, such as denying or justifying atrocities in Gaza, Xinjiang, Ukraine, or elsewhere.
- Use of fascist symbols & memes (e.g., Pepe the Frog), or 4chan/8chan screenshots.
- Support for regimes or ideologies that suppress basic human rights.
4. Misinformation and Pseudoscience
- No climate change denial or promotion of scientifically debunked conspiracy theories.
5. Violence and Threats
No threats of violence, incitement, or glorification of harm including terrorism, mass shootings, or political violence.
Joking about or fantasizing violence against individuals or protected groups is not tolerated.
7. Sexual Content and Exploitation
No sexually explicit content, porn, or fetish content
Strictly prohibited:
- Non-consensual sexual content
- Child sexual abuse material (CSAM) or any allusion to it
- Sexualization of minors, even fictional
8. Impersonation and Misrepresentation
- Do not impersonate other people (including accounts on other instances), public figures, or organizations. Satire is fine if obviously so.
- Do not create deceptive accounts or mislead others about your identity, affiliations, or intent.
9. Illegal Content
- Don’t post anything that could cause legal trouble for PieFed, piefed.social or the people involved.
10. Defederation
Generally this will be a last resort when problems from an instance are systemic or caused by the admins of the instance.
General Guidelines
- Keep discussion civil and on-topic.
- Respect privacy: do not post personal information (doxxing), even if publicly available elsewhere.
- Admins reserve the right to remove communities & content or ban users at their discretion to protect the integrity of the community.
- Repeatedly questioning moderation decisions in public threads may lead to removal. Instead email contact@piefed.social for feedback or appeals.
- Do not attempt to circumvent bans, content filters, or community guidelines.
Does this include posting original content like art and blog posts? Seems a bit too wide.
Love it.
This should maybe specify which jurisdiction PieFed is under to make it more transparant. Rule 3 could itself cause legal trouble in some countries.
Yeah, best leave it up to individual communities but then again rimu as an instance admin might have a strong stance on self promo which is okay too. It will be very hard to enforce though because it’s very easy to pretend not to be affiliated with promoted content. Something more enforceable is a ban of linking to digital storefronts of any kind, as well as customary ratio of not promoting anything beyond 10% of your overall output including comments.
I like it this way, and I think it covers the common scenarios. One thing I sometimes like to do is add a positive paragraph next to all the rules and limitations. Not just write what is disallowed, but what the place strives for and what it wants to be like.
Yes, for sure.
I’m a rule nerd and will nerd out a bit. When I modded a national subreddit we wanted to make rules more or less what your are aiming for here so allow me to share some experience.
I’ll post machine translated version of what we came up with and some rationale behind it.
We opted to not keep misinformation or nazi ban as a separate point because you don’t want to become an arbiter of truth on all things science or political ideology. Limit the scope to things where people can really harm themselves.
This is lifted near verbatim from Reddit content policy. It makes clear that prejudice based on inborn traits is forbidden but there needs to be a component where that trait makes you vulnerable to harassment, otherwise you’ll get religious people claiming they need to be protected. You’ll love last sentence when dealing with trolls too.
Don’t distinguish between promo and self-promo because on the internet nobody knows you’re a dog.
You really need outright doxxing ban and what constitutes personal info might be controversial. We wanted to avoid witch hunts of any kind and that did that.
Just leaving a comment to show my appreciation. Reading this reassured that I have joined the right instance. Big thanks!
You have a gap between point 5. and 6.
The self-promotion may invite drama. Just today Rimu posted that Piefed is really taking off, along with graphs to prove it, and a link to piefed.social. How would this, technically, not violate this rule; not be self-promotion? Rimu is the lead developer of Piefed. It's his website in the post. Seems to fit. If he posted this as a comment on another site, should they delete the comment?
And where's the line then? Is FOSS software OK because it's free, but software that charges for extra features is not OK? Or is all software OK if not a corporation, or is Signal OK because they are a non-profit corporation? What about Proton and Tuta mail? Would they violate this policy is they told someone who was concerned about privacy in Gmail to check out their products, or is that valid information in the discussion?
I'd leave it out, and I'd take it on a case by case basis and should I decide that I don't like it, which is my right as the one who pays the bill, I'd call it a violation of the advertising policy and be done with it.
============================
Stating political stances, I think, is inviting fights with the Admin and worse, calls for defederation of the site by people who will misread the intent after putting it through their political lens, and it will somehow become that piefed.social is or isn't a Zionist site, that is or isn't anti-Israel, and is or isn't anti-Semitic, and so on. It doesn't matter what the truth is. The accusations will come, and others with similar lenses will latch on to it.
Wouldn't it have been better for Lemmy if the tanky developers just never publicly said anything political?
I get reports constantly on Mastodon where the same person who has accused people of being anti-Semitic is being accused of being anti-Semitic simultaneously because they are all experts on Zionism and middle Eastern history and politics, and they are all angry. I keep my views to myself (except for my hatred for Trump and his enablers because I want my country back).
No matter how clearly you state it, people will apply your words to their agendas and it will get ugly. I recommend you don't go there.
Hmm yeah well said.
Although I don't think I can avoid taking political positions forever so if I take one right from the start then no one gets surprised / disappointed later when a perceived change would be more disruptive.
I think most of this is fine but I have a few issues and questions.
Thanks
I can see we're going to need a second draft. Thanks!
I agree about self promotion. A weeklt or monthly self peomotion thread is a good deal
What is happening in south africa do not meet the legal definition. Genocide in gaza is as clear as the holocust
I am a South African, there is no genocide here.
There are laws that discriminate against minorities based on the colour of their skin which might need some attention.
But no genocide in any way.
Indeed
All seems reasonable to me.
The only point I might quibble with is "Support for regimes or ideologies that suppress basic human rights.", as pretty much all regimes and many ideologies suppress basic human rights to some extent. It is good that the suppression of basic human rights itself is called out and condemned and not supported but it would be reasonable to support the good things that regimes do in countries like China, USA, Russia and many, maybe all others, support the good aspects of capitalism, socialism, religions, etc. Perhaps you had in mind more extreme regimes and ideologies. Drawing lines is always challenging. No clearer alternative comes to mind immediately. I would be most supportive of prohibiting support for regimes and ideologies where the suppression of basic human rights is a predominant or at least very significant aspect of what they do or promote. But I can't think how to express that clearly in a few words. It wouldn't put my off as-is as, ultimately, moderation is at the discretion of the admins anyway.
Maybe we need some examples.
Obvious non-negotiable cases:
Trumpism
Putin - war criminal
Netanyahu - likewise
Hamas - terrorists
North Korea
AfD (Germany)
Pinochet (Chile)
Proud Boys
On the edge but pretty much ok (community mods could choose differently):
CCP
Cuba
USSR (excl Stalinism)
Thai monarchy?
Examples is probably the most practical way to clarify. A few to start and add them as issues arise.
I know it is theoretically covered by something else but I think it's worth to add that no antisemitic content is allowed.
I also understand that on persons anti genocide is another persons antisemitism in some countries like Germany nowadays, but I would just follow the textbook definition strictly and distinguish between Israel as a national state and the Jewish people on the other side. (Similar to like we distinguish between the CPP and the Chinese people.)
Yeah that is a big one and pretty hard to get right.
Attacks based on race or religion are already prohibited so I don't feel a strong need to single out Judaism or the Jewish race for special protection. Genocide denial (e.g. holocaust) is likewise already prohibited.
As you said, separating out the government and the people helps find a way through this.
It's really up to the moderators of a community to deal with the finer distinctions and hopefully they'll be better placed to do that than I. With these instance-wide rules I'm trying to set the general minimum standards and let communities set higher or more finely-tuned standards as they wish.
"No bigotry" could potentially be added under rule 1, but I think I agree that the way the rule is formulated leaves very little room for it already.