Friendica Social Network

This has been a thing for awhile. It can be done to any user, remote or local, and it hides the users account on public timelines, making them basically invisible.

The newest feature couples this with hiding notifications from that user towards any user on your instance and there's no workaround anyone can use to see the silenced user that is trying to contact them.

Eugen has been actively doing this for a year or so now so that people discussing hot topics he doesn't agree with, can't be seen at all on mastodon.social🤦‍♂️

Moderation actions

Actions that can be taken against unwanted users or domains.

^{docs.joinmastodon.org}

@Exerra :javascript:

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Exerra :javascript:

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

Oh, that. I'm not against what it was like before (just hiding) as it still gave users the choice to interact with the silenced account & enjoy their content, however this seems... excessive.

This will be used to silence accounts with differing political views and that just feels icky. Mastodon is turning into a bubble and "just switch instances" doesn't work since if you spin up your own (& your political views differ) your account & instance will get blocked on other instances.

in reply to Exerra :javascript:

BeAware :veriweed:

in reply to Exerra :javascript: • 2 days ago • •

@exerra facts.

This is actively happening on the biggest instance because of one man's politics.

That instance has like 50% of all Fedi users....🤬

Everyone needs to get off of mastodon.social if they think their views are worth being seen.

People's opinions change and you never know when Eugen might start silencing you for your views because of a video he watched last night on YouTube.

@Exerra :javascript:

BeAware :veriweed: reshared this.

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Exerra :javascript:

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

I think a fundamental issue of Mastodon is that instance switching is so painful.

You can't migrate your posts & replies to them, so if you're someone who likes to build up a collection of posts and likes to see replies to those posts (for insights, useful links, etc) you are incentivised to stay. If you move, all of it is basically gone.

That's more of a protocol architecture limitation, I imagine.

I saw something about Firefish having a post importer, so I will check it out soon.

in reply to Exerra :javascript:

BeAware :veriweed:

in reply to Exerra :javascript: • 2 days ago • •

@exerra I don't recommend Firefish. Unfortunately the development isn't in the best state.

However, Sharkey can do the same and I definitely recommend it.

@Exerra :javascript:

in reply to Exerra :javascript:

Patrick

in reply to Exerra :javascript: • 2 days ago • •

@exerra There are a few other platforms that can talk to mastadon that let you import posts. But I've always been baffled as you can back them up, why there wasn't an import mechanism. Sure it might have to do change links or something (make them a plain text of the link?) but it should be workable.

@Exerra :javascript:

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Jerry Lerman

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

Naive me never even considered that the "limit" option could be used by an instance Admin to shadow-ban a user privately.

I find the feature useful and I have used it, perhaps 3 times, to limit a suspected spammer/scammer account until I could have a dialog with the account creator. But, in all cases, I notified them that I limited their account and explained the impact. I'd never limit (silence) an account secretly.

I think it is unethical for an instance owner to do so without notification to the account owner.

I don't know if it's truly happening on .social. I bet though there's a particular woman who does it often on her instance to her local accounts, but I won't mention her name. You know who I mean.

You always raise interesting questions.

BeAware :veriweed: reshared this.

in reply to Jerry Lerman

BeAware :veriweed:

in reply to Jerry Lerman • 2 days ago • •

@Jerry it is happening. I have several follow relationships with people that are silenced there and weren't notified.

They don't do moderation notifications. They operate like Shitter, but without the ability to stop people from leaving.

People need to start leaving or Eugen will own Fedi before you know it.

Nobody will be able to say anything that goes against Eugen's beliefs...😒

@Jerry Lerman

BeAware :veriweed: reshared this.

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Compuguy 🐱

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

@Jerry Partially why I run my own instance, much more fine grained control...

@Jerry Lerman

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Jerry Lerman

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

It's unethical Admin behavior, in my opinion, to shadow-ban.

I think I'll put a note about this in the "About" section for my instance to describe that Admins and moderators here are forbidden to shadow-ban (limit, silence) any account without notification to the account owner, a policy people should be aware that is not in effect on all instances.

Trust must work both ways to have an open working Fediverse.

I guess my only exception is that Threads accounts are all initially limited by default, and the limit is lifted on a per-Threads-account basis. But, this policy is made clear in my About section as well.

BeAware :veriweed: reshared this.

in reply to Jerry Lerman

Compuguy 🐱

in reply to Jerry Lerman • 2 days ago • •

@Jerry I would add an exception for data scraping users. They aren't contributing to the #fediverse and don't need notice.

#fediverse @Jerry Lerman

in reply to Compuguy 🐱

BeAware :veriweed:

in reply to Compuguy 🐱 • 2 days ago • •

@compuguy @Jerry those probably are just getting suspended. Except on .social! Eugen bans people talking about the Israel-Gaza conflict but allows data harvesting! Hurray!😒

Awakari has a few accounts there.

@Compuguy 🐱 @Jerry Lerman

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Compuguy 🐱

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

@Jerry You're referring to Eugen Rochko, right?

@Jerry Lerman

in reply to Compuguy 🐱

Jerry Lerman

in reply to Compuguy 🐱 • 2 days ago • •

@compuguy Yeah, he is.

@Compuguy 🐱

in reply to Jerry Lerman

Compuguy 🐱

in reply to Jerry Lerman • 2 days ago • •

@Jerry Cool...having the face of Mastodon doing what sounds like "shadow banning" of Xitter. Cool cool cool /S
😬

@Jerry Lerman

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Sibshops

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

is there a way to detect a shadow ban?

in reply to Sibshops

BeAware :veriweed:

in reply to Sibshops • 2 days ago • •

@Sibshops nope...and that's the big issue.

Only if you own your own instance and the entire instance is limited and not a single user.

Single users cannot see moderation actions against their account unless it's a suspension by the instance you reside. In which case you obviously wouldn't be able to use your account anymore.

This is much more malicious. It's like if your friends and family are dying, but your ability to speak out against it has to go through one person who says "fuck your family and friends" and stuffs a rag in your mouth.

@Sibshops

in reply to BeAware :veriweed:

Sibshops

in reply to BeAware :veriweed: • 2 days ago • •

how about if you make anoher account on the same or other instance?

Maybe there is a way to detect it that way.

This entry was edited (2 days ago)

in reply to Sibshops

BeAware :veriweed:

in reply to Sibshops • 2 days ago • •

@Sibshops you can detect it if the specific instance that silenced you, has their search public. Then you go to the instance you suspect silenced you and search for yourself.

Then when you click the profile, it will say "moderators of this instance have silenced this account, do you want to view it anyway?"

But then you have to have a clue that you've been silenced on a specific instance.

Silences aren't federated, but .social is big enough that they have a majority of Fedi users at this point.

@Sibshops