this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2025
760 points (98.7% liked)
/0
1643 readers
25 users here now
Meta community. Discuss about this lemmy instance or lemmy in general.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
760
Instance policy update: Votes are in and Xitter links are now banned on this instance
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
Ahoy mateys!
We are closing the voting on this topic a couple of days early as the result is already conclusive., Our threshold for passing the motion was for 2/3 of voting members in favor. We have far exceeded that threshold (see below) and have a good number of overall responses, so the proposed policy change has now been approved and takes effect immediately.
Our new policy on Xitter links
- No Xitter links are to be posted on this instance from the date of this announcement.
- Workarounds such as link shorteners and alternative front-ends that resolve to Xitter posts are also banned.
- Screenshots will still be permitted as per the overwhelming number of comments in support of this option.
- Exception: In rare cases there may be a need to verify the veracity of a Xitter post. If this need arises, then you may post a https://xcancel.com/ version of the link. Please note this option should only be used sparingly and exclusively for fact-checking purposes.
We will begin communicating this instance policy change to all our users today.
Please try to be helpful to anyone who accidentally posts a Xitter link who may not yet be aware of the policy change, and/or feel free to report in the usual way.
N.B.: For the loopholers - by "Xitter links" we mean any links to content hosted on X (formerly Twitter). Alternative Xitter front-ends are also banned under this policy, unless exception #4 applies. Edit: The ban also applies to other Xitter-owned domains such as their photo blobstore (pbs) domain at pbd.twimg.com
Thanks to everyone involved for participating in the vote!
**The final tally is as follows: **
- For:
(2), 
(7), 
(5), 
(3), 
(2), 
(1) - Against:
- Local Community: +2.6
- Outsider sentiment: Very Positive
- Total: +22.6
- Percentage: 100.00%
To break this down a little differently:
- Home instance users voted 93% in favor of the proposal (284/307)
- External instance users voted 97% in favor of the proposal (70/72 note: these are not counted, but good to know)
- Donating and vouched for users voted 100% in favor of the proposal (20/20 votes).
This is the best place to be.
Ahem... Gestures vaguely at the nsfw handle. Aside from the obvious upsides, not federating downvotes has been pretty good. I think my reader, connect, can turn them off. Just looked, maybe it doesn't, there a "show upvotes and downvotes" button. Regardless, this is not the place for that.
It would probably be good to get a general user off lemmynsfw though. "All" is cluttered with all sorts of nonsense.
now this is how you do a rule change!
- community poll
- exception for the huge perceived benefit of allowing screenshots
- workarounds and tools for when needed
- overall very well written and communicated
others (ahem) should follow the example you provided here!
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.
I don’t think pay to win democracy is a fair way to poll personally. Doesn’t fit right with me to give those with the luxury of spare cash a louder voice.
right! the math is crazy rigorous and i wouldn’t expect just any random admin to be able to do all that, but it’s certaintly something to aspire towards
Let's fucking go
extreme W
It would be nice if Lemmy had a plugin or something like that to change xitter links to xcancel.
It would be nicer if everything had that plugin.
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.
You can probably find an browser extension or violentmonkey script that will do it for you.
I've never seen such a one-sided poll. I'm very impressed.
anarchy brother. we self select pretty hard.
It reaffirms my decision both to migrate here for my home instance and to start donating when I did.
Beautiful.
I've asked this question before because I feel it's best to clarify: does this also include URLs to content hosted on related but separate services, like the image hosting CDN at pbs.twimg.com?
Thanks for the question. The ban also applies to other Xitter-owned domains such as their photo blobstore (pbs) domain.
Awesome, thanks.
About time. Good riddance. I hope other instances follow suit. Xitter is a damn plague.
We lost nothing of value!
Here here!
Threativore report filter has been setup for post url/body and comments. This filter will only apply to local communities. After a brief period of validating, we'll switch it to autoremove (which will provide a built-in appeal option)
Get 'em King.
As an external instance user, I would have supported this. Notable tweets can be reported on without giving any clicks to Xitter.
Good riddance! (and any other relatable Green Day songs)
American Idiot comes to mind.
twitter needs to F.O.D. already
Out of curiosity, what was the sentiment for those who voted against? Or did they not comment?
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.
Thanks for the summary. I think the rules you listed above capture all but the first.
I mean, the first is a whataboutism so I wouldn't even consider it. I would have said, "Fine... we'll discuss meta next but we're discussing Twitter NOW. If you are objecting because we aren't including Meta, then you're not debating in good faith."
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
So I'm going to put on my "devil's advocate" hat on for a sec, because there is a nuance here that's worth addressing.
I absolutely hate how politicians and governments use a third party, commercial social media platform to discuss and even announce policies. But it's where we are. So if shit for brains Madam President Trump makes some sort of shitty announcement on Twitter, I would agree a source is needed and, I would go so far as to say an actual twitter URL source, only because a third, third party (even xcancel.com as currently allowed) could manipulate or even change a tweet. I'm not saying they would, but having the direct unimpeachable source would be necessary.
Given the fact that tweets can't be viewed without an account, xcancel is a good compromise that can then be drilled down to its original source if needed.
Now, putting my devil's advocate hat off, it's a silly argument to vote against. I presume that the rules would allow you to post the URL in a comment or a post body, and only prohibits using a twitter URL as the source.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Congratulations
Seems like a great call!
Hey, there are only 20 paying users anyway, right? So were no vouchers used this time? And does a person vouching apply per vote or to the person (like is it a proxy vote or a renewable vote coupon?)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Those graphics are sick! :D
Heck yeah!
So archive links count as “alternative frontends”?
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.
I think picking one domain for fact checking purposes is the best option just for clarity purposes. I could see using archival links as a general 'banned domains' approach worth considering in the future.
+1 to this
I think that if we allow xcancel links for fact checking, archive links (and other nitter instances) should be allowed in that context as well, both for posterity (if tweet gets deleted) and since - from my experience - alternative front ends often come and go like the tide
Oh noooo...oh right, already had them blacklisted.
view more: next ›