Could Discuss.online become the go-to USA instance?

Hello everyone,

Following the recent discussions on !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com and !lemmyworld@lemmy.world , it seems that people realize that Lemmy.world is subject to European laws, and not the US ones.

This is another event where US citizens seem to be looking for an instance that would adhere to their "legal culture", the previous one being the US elections, where the topic was discussed everywhere, before getting channeled into !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world

I don’t know anything about Dutch or Finnish laws, but I’ve seen many recent articles about people arrested in Germany for their social media posts that were considered hateful or violent (which is frankly a culture shock to me as an American), so I can see why some of the posts on Lemmy in the past week would be concerning.

https://lemmy.world/comment/13870047

So, the question is: could Discuss.online become that instance? And host US-focused communities like "AskUSA", "USPolitics", "USFinance", this kind of things?

I am mostly asking because there's no secret that the DO admins aren't the biggest Lemmy fans, so would you guys be okay if your instance would get promoted, potentially causing an influx of users and communities, some requiring moderation?

You're viewing a single thread.

44 comments

FYI @jgrim@discuss.online and @lazyguru@discuss.online
- I won't speak for @jgrim@discuss.online (he's the primary admin, I just pretend to help out 😉), but I see no reason to be a "USA focused instance". We are open to anyone, anywhere as long as they are interested in open, respectful discourse staying within the code of conduct. Additionally, IMO having instances be "go to" instances kind of goes against a core concept of the fediverse. Anyone can run their own instance and get content from other instances (I don't recommend it though 😱). Themed instances are fine, but they don't advertise themselves as the "go to" for that theme, they just simply cater more to that style of communities. And with that description, Discuss.Online's only "theme" is that you discuss... things, online 😜
  
  Thank you for your comment!
  To be honest, the situation now feels like most of people on Lemmy are on LW, most of the communities are on LW, and that would probably stay this way if there is no incentive for people to look for other places.
  Your other comment touched upon the legal aspect, so I'm not going to talk about that here. There was another example of "US matters taking over the whole place" with the US elections. Some communities like !nostupidquestions@lemmy.world would have a majority of threads about that topic, overwhelming the community, especially members who were not US citizens.
  !asklemmy@lemmy.world took another approach: they forbid US politics questions. People then asked for a place to go, and it became !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world
  The whole thread is here: https://feddit.org/post/4482552
  We are now seeing a similar situation with the recent LW decision. People are looking for other instances and communities that would follow the legal framework they are used to, and that's why I mentioned that DO could become that US specific instance.
  they don’t advertise themselves as the “go to” for that theme
  They kind of do, or at least they differentiate on one aspect. All the German and French communities are hosted on feddit.org and jlai.lu. When people wanted to consolidate the electric vehicle communities, they chose slrpnk.net (https://feddit.org/post/4569227). Beehaw is known for their very strict moderation policies. Lemm.ee is known to be the "non defederating instance which is not LW nor lemmy.ml or hexbear"
  If a generic instance does not have a differentiator, there's almost no incentive for anyone to use it compared to let's say LW, SJW and Lemm.ee
  
  I don't think every instance has to have a "theme" that it remains exclusive to - although I agree with lazyguru that the existing theme already here is to have fun discussing things:-P - but isn't it enough that DO is welcoming to hosting communities that could meet the needs of the Fediverse as a whole?
  Perhaps in addition to !AskUSA@discuss.online we'll add AskLatinAmerica@discuss.online or CasualUS@discuss.online (although I think the former already covers that role?) or GlobalSouth@discuss.online (there is already a !globalsouth@lemm.ee I see). It doesn't need to be exclusive, just welcoming, which it already is:-).
  Especially since the role for the significantly more controversial !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world is already covered.
  Moving forward, either in this or another post, I would love to hear your thoughts as to what else would make the Fediverse more welcoming to people wanting to migrate here from Reddit? There's only so much distancing we can do from the tankie instances, apparently, but other than that I think Lemmy is off to a great start?
  
  Especially since the role for the significantly more controversial !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world is already covered.
  This one is probably going to look for another location if they can't discuss jury nullification of future crimes with the new LW ToS
  
  Things like AskUSA or USAFinances could go pretty much anywhere. And even USpolitics does not have to be so problematic. But it sounds like you want a space more for international people to talk about international matters, not only in relation to the USA, though perhaps sparked by events happening in the USA, at least for today but for tomorrow perhaps it will happen elsewhere.
  People discussing things in good faith can do so easily and anywhere, I generally find, but the problem with social media is that people who refuse to restrict themselves to good faith discussions will join as well. So basically you may be wanting 4chan, except without the toxicity - but that's not how that works, it would take enormous efforts to build something like that, which could be done but would be supremely difficult especially with the tools offered by Lemmy?
  
  Things like AskUSA or USAFinances could go pretty much anywhere.
  Hosting them on a US based instance seems better from a legal framework perspective, as we see with the clash between European and US legal cultures on LW
  4chan
  Oh no, definitely not. More like a community for US Americans to discuss without being subject to German laws, as it seems to be an issue from time to time
  
  If your goal though is to see how far you can push the law, then it sounds like someone would need a lawyer? I am not one, nor do I have money I want to pay to one to find out. Why does it matter where the exact line could theoretically be drawn, if it's so dangerous to even approach it? Like child porn or piracy - even if merely sharing links to such rather than the reality of such directly, sites get taken down all the time, and then those sites aren't useful for anything at all.
  I get that you are trying to do some kind of morality crusade about the rightness of the cause of whatever, but nobody knows what the USA is going to look like in the next month, 3 months, 6 months, or a year. The DOJ (Department of Justice) may be removed entirely, along with several other departments in the government, and what will then take its place?! Even if that were not true though, the DOJ could ask Discuss.Online for the IP addresses of everyone who interacts with this server. With names and identities revealed, anyone who has commented on this post may be investigated. Why risk that? And totally aside from any consequences to users, what if some agency had to ask jgrim and lazyguru for such records every single time a post like this happened - or even anytime someone responded, or even voted? It could be a huge nuisance even just to comply. Or not, what do I know, but I didn't sign on to make another, better, more friendly 4chan, or to come anywhere within a mile (or kilometer, whatever) of something even remotely illegal.
  And telling people that murder is okay - regardless of the rightness or wrongness of such (e.g. even if not serious but merely to lay off some steam) - seems to fall into that category?
  You say it's definitely not 4chan, but it sounds an awfully lot like 4chan, or if you meant to make it better than that, the difference hasn't been made clear, nor how much effort it would take to achieve, nor do I see anyone volunteering to do that effort either. (Edit: and to be clear, I'm not volunteering for such either.)
  
  the DOJ could ask Discuss.Online for the IP addresses of everyone who interacts with this server. With names and identities revealed, anyone who has commented on this post may be investigated. Why risk that?
  But that's beyond the question I was asking. From https://discuss.online/legal
  discuss.online is operated by Jason Grim, LLC., and is hosted on servers operated in United States of America. All content on this server is expected to be legal in all of these jurisdictions.
  So whatever the current laws of the USA are, then Discuss.online will comply.
  something even remotely illegal.
  Neither did I. It just seems that the USA have different laws than the ones Lemmy.world is operating under.
  And telling people that murder is okay - regardless of the rightness or wrongness of such (e.g. even if not serious but merely to lay off some steam) - seems to fall into that category?
  That's probably the core of the question. People in the LW thread were advocating that jury nullification for future crimes is legal in the USA. If it is, and if there is no clear rule on DO to prevent those (as far as I've checked, there aren't, but happy to be wrong on this), there are two options
  add a rule similar to the LW one
  accept that people talk about jury nullification for future crimes
  You seem to prefer the first option, but then you probably need to had this one to the rule of !AskUSA@discuss.online
  
  Also, IANAL and neither is @jgrim@discuss.online. We are not about to say this instance allows you to comply with all legal obligations for your geographical location in the world - that's up to you as an individual.
  
  On that specific topic, what is your stance on this decision by the LW admins?
  https://discuss.online/post/14139596
  I saw a lot of US citizens in the comments surprised as the differences on laws about "free speech" between the US and Europe (see example in the OP), what would be DO's stance on this matter?
  
  what is your stance on this decision by the LW admins
  I don't have one. LW and DO are very different in size (number of users, number of communities, AND traffic). I also won't get drawn into a debate about how one instance chooses to govern vs how we do (not saying that's what you were doing, just saying this is my only reply on the topic)
  
  Let's maybe clarify my question: is it allowed to discuss jury nullification on DO, and if yes, are there conditions to do so?
  
  That's a fairly broad and loaded question. We tend to defer to moderators for taking actions in the various communities. The question you've asked here has no context to it. It's like asking if it's ok to talk about getting drunk. Yes, you can talk about getting drunk. Can you talk about encouraging people to get drunk and then go drive a car? What about drinking to the point of alcohol poisoning? What about encouraging people to get drunk in a MADD community? All of these have different context to them and you can obviously see where in at least some of them you'd likely find yourself with a warning or being banned from the community (and in one, there's potential your own mother might call you out). I don't think it's possible to list out all of the possible scenarios a particular topic is allowed to be discussed. So my answer is, read the code of conduct of this server AND the one of the community you are posting in (paying special attention to the sections about harassment along with the definition of harassment), then use common sense about whether a particular topic is allowed.
  
  Thank you
  
  Some people get the nuance and abide. Some people get the nuance and choose to troll. Some people really do not get it due to an inability to understand social concepts. ‘Mental reasons’. The latter cannot be expected to possess common sense.
  
  I agree.
- Thanks!

44 comments