this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2025
13 points (74.1% liked)

Blahaj Lemmy Meta

2529 readers
39 users here now

Blåhaj Lemmy is a Lemmy instance attached to blahaj.zone. This is a group for questions or discussions relevant to either instance.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've seen a lot of instances of people on Lemmy saying you can get banned from Blahaj for forgetting someone's pronouns. And then Ada has to come in and explain why they're wrong in their interpretation of the rules. These people were banned for good reasons, they're transphobes. But I think they misunderstand the rules of Blahaj for a legitimate reason.

It's because Blahaj doesn't have rules. It has two guidelines. Very subjective ones. People want to know what will get them banned, so they try to understand the rules of that subjectivity. The rules for what Ada considers to be empathy and inclusion. The rules of Ada's psychology. Because like it or not, with highly subjective guidelines, Ada's interpretation and understanding of that subjectivity is the rules.

And Ada didn't write the rules of her psychology in the sidebar. So people have to speculate. And people are speculating wrong, and starting arguments about it.

I think a ruleset should be a transparent explanation of how a mod team thinks about acceptable behaviour. By not having rules, Blahaj is being opaque about how the mod team thinks. And the only way for people to deal with that is to practice amateur psychoanalysis. Which is unpleasant and creates division.

If people understood how trans people think about acceptable behaviour, they wouldn't be transphobes. So the result of this system is that everyone who is banned for transphobia doesn't understand why and needs it personally explained to them. If the sidebar explained acceptable behaviour in a way everyone can understand, they wouldn't misunderstand it so often.

I think the current system is creating pointless drama.

(page 2) 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 days ago

I think your post is creating pointless drama.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago (4 children)

I can never stress in strong enough terms how far outside of “Blahajism” my entire life has been… but even I can grasp that Ada’s house has Ada’s rules. (Whether they be opaque or not). If I don’t agree I have two options: shut the fuck up or leave.

If you struggle / have issues with recent pronouns then, I don’t know, perhaps just refer to people by name? It’s not rocket surgery.

I strongly believe that drama only exists where people want drama to exist. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and speculate that the majority of Blahajists have more than enough (unwanted and unwarranted) drama in their day to day lives just trying to exist. I think these folk deserve a bit of peace and quiet - especially in their own backyard.

Should I ever get banned for bumping my gums too loudly then I’ll just move on (sadly) and file it under “life lessons”.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

trolls aren't going to not troll just because there are well defined rules, in fact in can have the opposite effect, trolls using the rules as a weapon in their trolling.

in some of your comments you talk about checks and balances in terms of governance. well lemmy is not a democracy plain and simple, server owners have full control, and this is a feature not a bug. having full control means that you can abuse your power sure, but echo chambers aren't fun without people to troll, and the open nature of the fediverse means people will go wherever they like best. and for what it's worth the vibe here is better than anywhere else on lemmy in my experience.

and as for your last point, this space is not intended for transphobes to better themselves, it is meant as a place for trans people to feel safe. if a troll comes here and betters themselves somehow, great, but that's not the goal of this place. we're here because we're sick of having cis het normative being the standard, and we wanna be ourselves, not conform to the straights and what they want us to be.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 days ago

I'm not sure I get your logic for how transphobes wouldn't be transphobic if they understood the rules. Anti-lgbt behavior is very clearly listed as an example of not okay behavior within the guidelines. This is a safe space and anyone who needs to read some comprehensive incredibly detailed ruleset to act cordial won't read that ruleset in the first place. The guidelines as is seems to work just fine with only transphobes complaining as far as I can tell.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 3 days ago

I disagree completely

Principles are always better than rules.

Rules are inflexible, and lead people into thinking that there's ways around them, that you can game the system because the rules aren't written that way. It also leads to thinking that if it isn't a rule, you can do it.

Guiding principles are flexible, more enduring. But they take more work on the part of the people handling situations as they arise.

A set of principles, with examples, tends to work much better long term.

Otherwise, you just keep stacking rules. You stack rules high enough, nobody can remember them all, and they topple.

Besides, ain't nothing about lemmy fully democratic. At some point, someone is handling the hardware and keeping the connection alive. Whoever that happens to be is the one that has to carry the weight of decisions, even if there's an illusion of collaboration. Maybe if society as a whole gets rebuilt, it could be fully community run, but I tend to believe humans suck at that once the group gets over about a dozen people, so I'm dubious something as big as an instance is ever gong to actually function without an organizer (be that a smaller group or an individual).

But, here, now, on this instance, it's working very well. It weeded out folks that didn't agree with the principles as explained. It made a clear line to anyone not on the instance, and it is definitely known that those principles are not to be fucked with

That seems like a highly successful forum to me.

Who cares about external criticism at all? Even internal criticism is of dubious value when the goal is a protected community. Hell internal and external validation is of dubious value. What matters is that things work. And they do. Very, very well.

The whole idea that someone banned for transphobic activity needs a personal explanation is, frankly, malarkey. Blahaj ain't about the folks that aren't on board with the goals. That's the only explanation needed: you done fucked up, bye.

You know the idea of "It isn't my job to educate you"? It's part of every marginalized group's evolution. At some point, it isn't the black person's job to educate white people about their lived experience. It isn't the gay man's job to explain to the straights what gay culture is, and why they have a right to exist.

It isn't the admins' job to educate any of us. Their job is keeping things running, and keeping the space one that folks can just be in.

Rules. Rules. They're fine for some things. I don't think they're useful here.

Which, please note that my statement of external validation being of dubious value applies to this entire comment.

But, for me, I see what they're doing here, and it's beautiful.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The problem with defining the rules rigidly, is that it ties the mods hands when a bad actor starts doing stuff that while technically is within the rules, is still bad faith.

Its not that hard to fit within the guidelines.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

How about a compromise: keep the principles, then nobexhaustively list common examples of how those apply.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago (5 children)

That's already how it works :)

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

No, that's ridiculous. The admins can just change the rules to close the loophole.

That's how the government does laws. They don't just wave their hands and say "don't misbehave". Problems like police brutality are more likely to happen when enforcers don't clearly understand the rules, and aren't held to them.

But the government still makes an effort to control corruption by having clearly defined rules, and that's good. That leads to less abuse of power.

Blahaj is supposed to be a safer space for trans people than the streets of most countries. It should be more careful about the rules, not less.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

Laws need to be stringent because governments involve lots of people, and people's livelihoods and well-being are on the line.

No one's livelihood is on the line here, worst case scenario they get banned and then they find a new server.

There's only two (really one) admins, and they enforce the safe space according to their own judgement. This isn't a government, it's a Lemmy server. Fleshing out rules would only invite rules lawyering which bigots love and is a headache for little practical gain.

There's no need to "control corruption" or prevent "enforcers not understanding the rules" when the person making the rules is also the person enforcing them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (5 children)

There's no need to "control corruption" or prevent "enforcers not understanding the rules" when the person making the rules is also the person enforcing them.

That's exactly when you most need to control corruption. You're talking about the legislative and executive branches of governance. Most states separate those TO control corruption. I don't think it's practical to control corruption that way on an internet forum, but that's why the other controls need to be stronger to pick up the slack.

People like PugJesus think they're controlling corruption. PugJesus is a transphobe, the specific decisions he thinks are abuse aren't. But people like him don't have the ability to read Ada's mind, so she's got to explain it to every single one of them or they'll all start rumours about what the secret rules of Blahaj are. And Blahaj certainly does have secret rules. They're the rules of how Ada thinks. And everyone is interested in knowing them, since she won't explain them.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

My point is that rules do nothing to "control corruption" as you put it.

In an instance like this where there's only one active admin, the rules are fundamentally just a courtesy to the users. The owner can just do whatever they want.

It doesn't ultimately matter what their rules are. Anti corruption laws exist IRL so they can be enforced by the government on its own members, but when the "government" is one person what are they gonna do, say "welp I made a rule against corruption, guess I gotta stop being corrupt." The very concept of controls is silly.

Ada owns this space, so she decides how to run it. I like that because it means there's no room for arguments over what's technically within the rules or not. Are you transphobic/potentially harmful to the safe space? You're out.

Writing down a million rules to explain Ada's internal logic for banning people would be ridiculously infeasible because it's such a personal thing. But for people who like the way that Ada runs things, it's a nice space. Anyways, I don't particularly want "polite transphobes" here who are capable of following the rules if written out but would be horribly transphobic otherwise.

EDIT: what even is "corruption" in this context? I feel like your government analogy doesn't apply very well to this situation

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago

I do feel sorry for instance administrators that get roped into the moderation decisions of communities. Instances should provide very broad and strict rules meant to keep the system running and out of legal liability. It doesn't need to be so specific about content.

It is communities and their mod teams (who not bound by the instance) to operate within that framework to set and enforce rules for content moderation.

But FWIW at least one of those prominent bans a bit ago were WELL aware of why they were banned. They intentionally went to get banned to spark a debate on the rules and specifically to draw the instance admin into it.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I think the mods are doing just fine, and keeping it free and loose instead of bogged down with concrete legalese-esque rules makes for a good vibe. It seems like "don't be a dick" is pretty much the stance and I'm all for it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I've seen lots of people be dicks on Blahaj. Because my understanding of being a dick is different to Ada's. Everyone's is. We all have different life experiences, values, triggers.

Transphobes are going to keep on criticising Blahaj as long as they think transphobia isn't dickish. Which is as long as they're transphobes. The rules complaints are going to just keep on happening forever unless Blahaj gets rules.

The only other communities where I've seen as much drama over the rules are Beehaw, which is designed the same way, and .world, which wouldn't state an admin position on advocating violence for a long time. Ambiguity creates conflict.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Where are these frequent rules complaints you mention?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

100% agree. The mods here are some of the best I've seen in my roughly 23 years online and it's going fine.

The loose rules are part of it. They have the right vibes. I simply don't see a large amount of drama.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Tbh, I wish I was half as capable at being a mod as most of the ones here, and I couldn't hope to admin even half that well

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›