• He/Him

30s || 🇧🇷 || Plenty of smut repost so 🔞|| Occasionally random thoughts and/or games

Last.FM


staff
@staff

hello cohosters,

we've seen recent discussion around a need for moderation changes. we've had conversations internally, and are implementing the following process and policy changes, effective immediately:

reporting transparency

currently, when you report something we review it, take appropriate action, and close your ticket. we've avoided telling you if we did or didn't take action (and our reasons for doing so) to help preserve user privacy and reduce moderator workload (making it easier to effectively moderate the website). it's become clear this isn't adequate. the lack of transparency reduces trust in the reporting process, leading to fewer reports, leading to less visibility on our end, leading to worse moderation. we can't see everything happening on the website; we are fully dependent on user reports, and we need to restore trust in the process.

from now on, we will be providing a brief overview of action taken on reports. this will include what action was taken (e.g. ban, warning, removing a post, no action, etc) but may not include specifics to protect user privacy.

we expect that this change will lead to further discussion in the future. we might not always take the action you think we should. we want to know when we get it wrong; it's easier to correct our mistakes when we know about them, rather than letting something fester until it boils over. we're not going to get things right every time, but our hope is that transparency will help us get things right more often.

broken stair policy (aka "get the hell off my website, asshole")

cohost staff reserves the right to ban anyone from the site for any reason. this policy has been in place since the founding of the site, with the primary goal of kicking off assholes who make everyone's experience worse, regardless of if they're breaking codified rules.

this policy is poorly defined, uncodified, and rarely used. when we moved to having full-time trust and safety staff, we failed to adapt this policy into something we could actually enforce.

we are codifying a clearer version of this policy. the final wording will be added to the community guidelines during the work-week, but the sentiment takes effect immediately.

If you are frequently reported for or found to be shitstirring, getting into arguments, or otherwise being routinely unpleasant to others, we will ban you from the website. we don't need assholes on the website.

determining what falls into these categories will continue to be a judgement call. we will continue to offer warnings before resorting to a ban, but if we catch you doing that shit repeatedly then you're gone.

as a reminder: racist, homophobic, transphobic, and other hateful behaviors are already banned under our community guidelines. you will not receive a warning for being a hateful piece of shit, you will be banned on the spot, and we will be glad to do it.

thanks for using cohost. enjoy the rest of your weekend.


YuushaRuby
@YuushaRuby

“racist, homophobic, transphobic, and other hateful behaviors are already banned under our community guidelines. you will not receive a warning for being a hateful piece of shit, you will be banned on the spot, and we will be glad to do it.”

User @notnull was spewing racist garbage at Asian users and was notably not “banned on the spot” and “still has an account on cohost.org”

I’ve reported several users being racist or antisemitic that were not “banned on the spot”

Is banning racists “on the spot” a new policy in that case? I’m really curious about this.

Apparently we can take a hard stance on “shit stirring” and users doing things like calling racists “clowns” but not actual fucking racism.

Y’all are basically enforcing the racist tendencies of this website. I’ve seen other users, and I have been, personally reprimanded for giving shit to racists only for the racists in question to not be banned. This is fucking ridiculous and you are hemorrhaging black and brown users from this site on a near daily basis.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @staff's post:

If I had a nickel for every community I was in that was ruined by a very small number of "regulars" who constantly made trouble but couldn't be banned because they "didn't break a rule" then, idk, I'd have a few nickels at least

Thank you for always trying to make Cohost a healthy place, in so many meanings of the word, and doing it ways that are sometimes harder than doing it the way everyone else on the web is, even when it doesn't always work out. I hope these changes mean more of the community that wants to be here can participate and feel safe here.

I wish this had come earlier, so that some folks who have (justifiably) left might still be around. But thank you for attempting to strengthen these policies.

NOTE: This is not a callout of any particular staff (in)action and/or person leaving, just a comment on the aggregate.

Credit at least for actually bothering to say something in a timely fashion. Hopefully its not too late for this to actually have a meaningful impact but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

the transparency thing is good, but i hope you're ready to stick to your guns when choosing "no action" and explaining your rationale in the face of a coordinated group of angry power users. it is good for bad behavior to be called out and reported and for it to lead to bans. it is extremely bad for the site to acquire a reputation as one where if you express angry disagreement with any of a particular group of friends who have been hear a long time, they browbeat staff into banning you.

it is always a judgment call and you will be wrong sometimes and you will get convinced by user outcry sometimes and you will change your mind and unban people sometimes and it's all fine. but the important thing is that everyone wants to be here because we've chosen to trust your judgment, and its important that that leave room for the loud crowd to be wrong sometimes.

PLEASE NOTE: I have not been paying attention to any specifics of the recent drama. This is not a vaguepost about particular users, nor do I suspect that any inappropriate bans have been handed out. I'm just worried about the repeated pattern I've seen of user outcry leading to staff action. Again, I think this is generally good. I just think it also naturally leads to participating users starting to see themselves as having a kind of power that isn't actually appropriate in this setting.

really trusting in you guys to stick to your word, there used to be a problematic user that just kept getting away with being mean to others despite being reported numerous times

I can appreciate the "broken stair policy" lol. I always hate people who just barely skirt the line of rule breaking and then argue "haha you can't touch me I didn't break a rule". It's like people are just so insanely entitled these days that they think that there is some invisible law that says they can't be banned unless you can prove they broke a rule and they just abuse that assumption.

Ah, the thing Tumblr should have done all along, but didn't. If I was unsure about staying on Cohost before, I'm certain I'll be sticking around for a long, long time now.

And while I'm sure moderation will be pretty overwhelming as Cohost grows, I'm glad humans will be making any final calls. Yes, humans make mistakes (that time when Australia decided that women who are somewhat flat-chested are actually minors, regardless of their real age), but AI and other programs tend to make more and worse mistakes (when the Tumblr porn ban yeeted me for 2 years because I posted a picture of a flower that didn't even remotely look pornographic).

It'll be tough, but the better the moderation in the beginning, the less likely it becomes an overblown problem in the future (esp. if bans go by IP to avoid the issue of a-holes just making new accounts)