Fun things admins could inflict upon naughty users, if #Mastodev did punishments:
1) Make their posts not federate.
2) Make their posts unboostable.
3) Delay all their posts by 12 hours.
4) Replace their avatar with a dunce icon.
5) Forbid all posts not containing the #imsorry hashtag.
6) Disemvowelment.
7) Dolphinism.
All punishments would have built-in time limits. 🤡 👮 😆
... why block when you can publicly shame?
Seriously, if we want to deter bad behaviour, blocking (especially instance blocking with broad collateral damage) is one of the worst tools I can imagine.
This whole platform is one big look-at-me look-at-me look-at-me tool, so make the punishments fit the crimes. Make bad actors look bad.
@HerraBRE
Yeah. Sure. We need a police here. And judges.
:sarcasm:
@MyPlanet You're probably right. No sarcasm. 😁
@HerraBRE
Mastodon gives to each user the tools to manage the time line. And they're working for more tools. That's what I like: nobody but me decide what my account will be.
(A few time ago FB and Twitter censured Art painting because of nudity. Then decide for the world wide what you're allowed to see... I'm really angry about that)
I don't want that. (even if your ideas to 'punish' with Dolphinism make me laugh 😀)
@HerraBRE why choose only one? publicly shame by announcing the high crimes for which the blocking is a moral sanction!
Blocking and different decisions around that are completely expected. Society is not one big happy family of folks who always get along. We're not "all in it together" as David Cameron, the notorious porcine worrier, once said. In fact, the ability to block people or instances you don't like is a feature rather than a bug. It's something you can't easily do in the homogenized space of the silos.
@HerraBRE It's best to have both. Some instances simply aren't worth federating with, and blocking protects local users the same way banning a local bad actor would. At the same time, having the option to institute lesser restrictions that give bad actors a chance to correct behaviors would be hella useful, too. It would still be up to instance admins to decide which responses fit best with which infractions, but give us more options, not fewer.
I am now going to go out, enjoy some sun and good food, and entertain myself by thinking about gamification of disemvowelment and dolphinism.
Eee, eee eeEEEE, eeeEE!
@HerraBRE
When I joined the federation I remember remarking that admins had the power of feudal Lords.
Could we build in some sort of democratic process for this sort of thing on an instance before giving admins more unchecked power ?
@Divan Ten flags and you get disemvoweled for 24 hours. Twenty and you're a dolphin.
Anyone can flag you... but at a cost. Flagging someone is like being flagged twice yourself and you then can't post anything yourself for 15 minutes.
Then we just keep adding rules until the system is complicated enough to make EVERYONE happy. 😆
@HerraBRE This is exactly like real democracy 😂
@HerraBRE omg like you could only say "e" for a while? I love that
@HerraBRE great ideas :D They'll surely help defuse some situations.
But still, some things are endemic of public spaces, a definitive solution is impossible.
Some of the "punishments" I half-jokingly proposed earlier today are quite silly.
This was not because I want to make light of bad behaviour; but because it is useful to have proportionate responses to things.
If the only punishment you have is the death penalty, then pickpockets will go unpunished.
(See other post in this thread for half-baked ideas on how communities could self-police and not rely on all-powerful admins.)
@HerraBRE Some good ideas here. I'm taking notes...
@woozle Thank you! I'll be here all week.
Obviously all above techniques could be deployed against an entire instance as well, because group warfare should be fun!
Imagine an instance-wide disemvowelment. That'd teach 'em.