Essentially, the policy is to distance .world from
other instances that have a more…. Locked down/strict approach. Or in other words, the purpose of the change is to not have .world’s moderation resemble the oppressive methods of moderation of some of the other popular instances.
Its intention is to stop heavy-handed moderation, and instead create discussion and debate. To not have mods knee-jerk remove/ban content that could have been left to remain and debated. The problem is, it was confusing in its delivery.
But don’t let this get in the way of whatever grudge you’re holding.
The purpose is, as .world’s has always been (we all remember the infamous bot), to spread disinformation, though this policy is clearly an escalation in that regard, forcing mods to actively promote it even if they don’t want to.
At this point no amount of vacuous sophisms can hide that.
Essentially, the policy is to distance .world from other instances that have a more…. Locked down/strict approach. Or in other words, the purpose of the change is to not have .world’s moderation resemble the oppressive methods of moderation of some of the other popular instances.
Its intention is to stop heavy-handed moderation, and instead create discussion and debate. To not have mods knee-jerk remove/ban content that could have been left to remain and debated. The problem is, it was confusing in its delivery.
But don’t let this get in the way of whatever grudge you’re holding.
The purpose is, as .world’s has always been (we all remember the infamous bot), to spread disinformation, though this policy is clearly an escalation in that regard, forcing mods to actively promote it even if they don’t want to.
At this point no amount of vacuous sophisms can hide that.
We see what we want to see, don’t we?
No, I’d pretty much rather not see it, but it is what it is.