Sounds like a perfectly good reason to check out whether your local library has it. And/or take up a career in sailing.

Hey,

I actually reached out via email and was in contact with someone at Info@lemmy.world. I can respond again and see if there is progress this time.

tl;dr (if I am getting this right):

• Sometimes moderators don’t get if something is forbidden under the TOS, or believe something should be forbidden but isn’t. Ask an admin if uncertain.

• Moderators can further restrict content beyond the bare minimum of the TOS. Please don’t complain to the admins if a moderator does this (in good faith, obviously).

• Conversely, moderators, please read the TOS and don’t tell someone something is forbidden under it if it actually isn’t.

• Previously, admins told mods to remove content re: Jury nullification when discussing violent crimes.

• Currently, this has been limited only to discussion of jury nullification of future violent crimes, as it could imply someone should actually perform said violent action because they would be acquitted via jury nullification. As far as I can tell, this is the only actual change of any rule in this post.

Summary over, personal thoughts follow: That one specific change, I don’t actually have any issue with. Reasonable enough. Obviously the devil is in the details of what is forbidden under “advocating violence”; that is a monstrously complex discussion beyond the scope of this particular announcement. Furthermore, the value of some of the clarifications in this post are dependent on admins actually holding an open dialogue with users, the track record of which is… variable. (I am still waiting on a response from months ago, which I was then told would be available in a few weeks.)

Additionally, since lemmy.world remains federated with other instances which tolerate unpleasant behavior and I see no indication on this post that this will change, this functionally changes little of users’ ability to access that content and contribute to it anyhow.

We should be careful to avoid creating communities that are echo chambers.

I’m afraid that ship is already sailed, foundered, and is well on the way to the bottom in a lot of communities.

When it comes to spicy topics, many communities on Lemmy feel incredibly close-minded and hostile to opposing views.

Yep. The doublespeak here is wild. “Controversial topics can and should be discussed, as long as they are not causing risk of imminent physical harm. Therefore, we are leaving up comments that cause imminent risk of physical harm.”

Forget the particular details of this issue. It feels way, way more strongly like they’re trying to duck out of having to take action.

This is a big thing killing my interaction with Lemmy as well. I want to like it, but I drop into a discussion thread and the top-engaged/boosted comments are spicy and almost designed to promote maximum anger. And I feel like, “Do I really, really want to spend significant time writing out a deeper comment to engage with this community…?”