Lemmy is federated and decentralized and that means that we can all coexist regardless of our differing political opinions. I think it's important to preface this by saying that I am not offended by or concerned with anyone's politics, and I'm certainly not here to argue with anyone about them.
My concern is that users are being banned and content is being removed on lemmy.ml citing a rule that is not publicly stated anywhere that I have seen.
Moderators of lemmy.ml are removing posts and comments which are critical of the Chinese government and are banning their authors.
This came to my attention because of how lemmy user bans are federated just like everything else, and I was confused about why my instance had logged a lemmy.ml user ban citing "orientalism" as the reason for the ban.
Here's the article that was removed, titled "China may face succession crisis". It was published by axios.com, which mediabiasfactcheck describes as having "a slight to moderate liberal bias" and gives its second-highest ranking for factual reporting. The article writes unfavorably of Chinese President Xi Jinping.
I had not remembered seeing anything in lemmy.ml's rules that would suggest that "orientalism"—meaning, as I understand it, the depiction or discussion of Asian cultures by people in Western ones—was against the rules. So I checked, and I found that there was not. Not on the instance's front page, and not in !worldnews@lemmy.ml.
There is a stated rule against xenophobia, but I think that xenophobia is not widely understood to include Westerners writing critically of the actions of an Asian government.
This is where I went from confused to concerned.
Lemmy instances have public moderation logs, which I think is a very positive thing about the platform. So I looked more closely at lemmy.ml's moderation log.
Please note that moderation logs are also federated. It's hard to be 100% sure which instance a mod action is actually associated with, looking at these logs. The previously mentioned user ban and post removal were, I think, definitely actions taken by lemmy.ml moderators. My own instance's mod log identifies the banning moderator as a lemmy.ml admin, and the removed post was submitted to a lemmy.ml community. I've done my best to verify that all of the following removals were really done by lemmy.ml moderators, but I can't be absolutely certain. Please forgive me if any of them were actually made on other instances that do have an explicitly stated rule against orientalism.
Removed Comment Ah yes. Being against China's racist genocide is racist. China, the imperialist ethno-state, is clearly innocent. by @CrimsonOnoscopy@beehaw.org
reason: Orientalism
Removed Comment Lol. Thinking some countries have better governments than others is supremacist? Whatever, dude. By the way. If there are any countries with decent governments, I don't know of them. But like. If there were decent countries, they wouldn't behave like China. by @balerion@beehaw.org
reason: Orientalism
These following moderator actions did not specifically cite orientalism, but did not seem to be breaking any of the instance's or community's explicitly stated rules.
Banned @0x815@feddit.de
reason: Only makes anti russia and anti china, crosspostst from reddit. 2nd temp ban
expires: 9d ago
Removed Comment Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia and Tibet are all Colonies of China, which it treats as Colonial Territories, by - Forcibly destroying the local culture. Forcefully extracting to harm of the locals. Genocide, abuse, kidnapping, rape. But there is no point in engaging to you. You are a liar. You know you are. When you deny genocides, you put yourself on the same side as the fascists and reactionaries of the past. by @CrimsonOnoscopy@beehaw.org
reason: Rule 1 and 2
I have no affection for the Chinese government and I do not call myself a communist. I would not enforce a rule against orientalism on my own instance. But I think that lemmy.ml's moderators are entitled to enforce whatever rules they please. It's only that, as the largest single lemmy instance so far, I believe that they have an obligation to disclose these rules, and an obligation to not ban users or remove content for failing to follow unobvious and unstated rules.
I'd like to raise some awareness about this, and I'd like to openly ask the moderators of lemmy.ml to state the rules that they intend to enforce clearly and explicitly.
I will be very clear and state it again: I am not asking for anyone to change their opinions or to not enforce a rule that they believe in. That is the great thing about lemmy, that we can coexist in this federated community even when we don't share the same opinions. What I am asking is for lemmy.ml's rules to be clearly stated, because I think it does not reflect well on the broader community if the predominant instance moderates its users and content according to rules that are not being explicitly disclosed.
Thank you for calling this out. I also noticed it in the modlogs a few minutes into using my account. I find it extremely concerning that mods in the largest Lemmy instance are removing articles even slightly critical of China. And it was on the World News page. This kind of censorship so early on this platform isn't great and we should call it out when we see it so that we can flock to more trustworthy communities on Lemmy.
With that said, this makes me pretty happy that Lemmy is federated. My ability to seek out instances with mods that don't have tendencies towards censoring opinions is comforting. And furthermore, I think it's really cool that we can all see the modlogs like that. It's a pretty good check on power hungry moderators.
Remarks that moderators find inappropriate, whether listed in the code of conduct or not, are also not allowed.
Besides agreeing to this moderation decision or not (I don't on the face value, but Lemmy has seen many trolls making similar seemingly okey comments just to later double down with outright racism), you will never get clear rules on moderation. It's always a bit of best effort guess by moderators and the rules are better left somewhat ambiguous because of that.
If you try to clearly state all rules, you will just end up with a huge wall of text that no-one reads other than some trolls that try to intentionally walk up right to the border of that is "legal" and test your patience as a moderator.
So what pineapple is pointing out, then, is that the lemmy.ml Overton window is (1) undocumented, (2) not an Overton window most people live and breath with.
Put another way, newcomers (and existing users who were blissfully unaware) would do well to be aware of that what they consider "safe" content will get you banned from lemmy.ml, but there's no indication of that in the rules.
Saying there's a catchall moderation policy to avoid having a wall of text doesn't address that. Not even a little bit.
If you try to clearly state all rules, you will just end up with a huge wall of text that no-one reads other than some trolls that try to intentionally walk up right to the border of that is “legal” and test your patience as a moderator.
There was a clearly stated reason for these removals, but it is a reason that does not appear either in lemmy.ml's rules list nor on the page that you listed.
There were additional moderator actions citing the same "orientalism" reason that occurred while I was writing the post:
I agree - and for better or worse, lemmy.ml is likely to be many users first experience with lemmy. As a new user myself, I subbed to a bunch of communities on lemmy.ml because it's what I interpreted as being the 'core' of lemmy. Ambiguous rules - especially ones resulting in bans for discussing articles from high quality news sources - is problematic and likely to turn some people off. This is particularly an issue when lemmy is building towards critical mass.
One of the principal complaints about reddit is power tripping mods - and it's distressing to see that seemingly built into the DNA of lemmy.
The flip side of course is that this has sort of opened my eyes to the power of lemmy and the fediverse.
I agree that ambiguous rules are necessary, but common sense should be enough to figure out most of it. !worldnews@lemmy.ml's opinion on China isn't really advertised (unlike !worldnews@lemmygrad.ml's)
I don't think there is an expectation that the rules from https://join-lemmy.org apply to every instance. That's just the software's "Join our kind" page.
Now lemmy.ml is a bit of a special case given that it's run by the dev's. However I wouldn't expect lemmy.ca to be beholden to any code of conduct. After all lemmygrad.ml is very not welcoming.
He is asking the moderators to justify "their" rules on "their" own instance, which I can understand. Arguing that this instance is predominant and therefore should be apolitical is where I disagree.
Op is obviously trying to create drama which is being shared on Reddit to discourage people from joining Lemmy ( not lemmy.ml the instance). Any new user who would spend a bit of time would figure out that there are many instances to all tastes, if not they could create their own instance.
If lemmy.ml has a rule that is something along the lines of "mods have the final say", then that's that. In any case, the mods have the final say. Move on with your life!
The fact checkers beloved by Western media outlets are completely in thrall to western government opinions. The idea that China is likely to face a 'succession crisis' is pretty absurd.