Charles Johnson23 июн., 18:02Banning Popehat was a profoundly stupid move by Bluesky. Moderation is a very difficult job at this kind of scale, and I tend to grant lots of leeway for that reason. But this move was simply indefensible.
Thembo23 июн., 20:27It's actually a very easy job and I could do it better than them for very affordable rates
Mark Russell24 июн., 03:51I like Bluesky but I’m not married to it. Being too dumb to recognize Popehat as one of the good guys is not a good sign for a platform. Certainly a permaban wasn’t called for. Very annoying.
Venis Bonewood24 июн., 00:40the entire bluesky team wish they could be tech billionaires and take personal offense I imagine
Joey P23 июн., 22:30Popehat is mostly an annoying dipshit crank but that post was extremely defensible. But the tech bro morons that run this shithole website want to suck up to Elon Musk
John Castiglione23 июн., 20:25The ban might or might not have been warranted given how they moderate generally, but it was a pretty textbook violation of their TOS, literally down to the phrasing.
bjkeefe24 июн., 04:26Do you know for sure that he is banned? I would like to think he is only suspended. And for a short time only, come to that.
Charles Johnson24 июн., 03:12This incident seems to me like a classic example of context loss, leading to a poor decision. You might say it’s enforcing “zero tolerance” and I’m not entirely opposed to that approach WHEN NEEDED. I just don’t think it was needed this time.
Charles Johnson23 июн., 18:09Nobody seems to know the exact reason for the ban, but it may have been a post about Elon Musk.
🐄🥚24 июн., 02:28i got banned for saying i hope someone who was starting a career in politics had a short life so like the moderation has always been pretty strict and y'all just didn't notice.
Defence Scheme Enjoyer 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇬🇱🇲🇽🇵🇸23 июн., 18:04That’s weird, considering the other actors they’ve left untouched.
Rretr232724 июн., 00:49I've been following PH for years, and really appreciate his varied contributions. That said, it's hard to have a moderation policy that doesn't react, in some form, to a post that essentially says "if only someone would kill X." It's not all that ambiguous a statement.
Hiding in the Attic23 июн., 20:45He called for someone to be murdered. Pretty wild you left that context out. It should be against the rules to call for someone to be murdered. If that’s not against the rules then you just want this place to be a moderation free place like X claims to be
Thomas [DARK MODE], DO23 июн., 18:10I wish there was some other less drastic form of punishment like deleting the offensive post.
gainesm23 июн., 21:09I can see why he got banned, but it should only be temporary since he wasn’t actually trying to urge anyone to commit that crime. Still, was kind of stupid phrasing to use. That word choice was always going to catch a ban.
Marie Antoinette's Porcelain Milk Pail23 июн., 21:06Searching for BSky used to have Popehat's account as a sub-header!
Ashanti Van Buren24 июн., 19:01If it were up to me I probably wouldn’t have banned him, but I get why they did. Imagine the same post but replace “Elon Musk” with someone prominent on the left. Don’t you think there would be huge pressure from the user base to ban the poster?
zoot car23 июн., 19:35Ehh, I caught a 72-hr suspension a month back for a "[public figure] should die" post, which I readily admit earning - if anything, I appreciate their consistency on this point
The French🥖Resistance ♒️💙🇺🇦☮️🌈🏳️⚧️✊🏽👨🏽🦽🐈⬛🐈24 июн., 00:18Popehat is hilarious and a gosh darn celebrity and bluesky was lucky to have him. Musk can probably get anyone banned anywhere now, so Popehat’s celebrity might have got him noticed by Musk. OTH, Musk is super busy rn denying he killed anyone w/his DOGE woodchipper and folks have got receipts!