A community for discussion and democratic decision making in the Divisions by zero.
Anyone with voting rights can open a governance thread and initiate a vote or a discussion. There's no special keywords you must be aware of before you open a thread, but there are some. here's the governance thread manual.
This is a FAF defederation vote for !multiverse.soulism.net. Note that I have tried to summarize views both for and against this proposal, rather than pushing a particular view. Please feel free to comment if you want to contribute your own thoughts and experiences.
The reason for this vote is that admins have been getting a lot of reports about Grail and Their instance from our users lately, but tbh I am not sure whether the reports warrant a ban or not. While most cases are more clear-cut, I wanted some more admin & community feedback on this one.
For context, the soulism instance is (for all practical purposes) a personal instance run by infamous fediverse "personality", Grail. Grail is suspected to be a recent alt of DroneRights aka HardlightCereal aka Exocrinous aka Dragon Rider aka Drag.
Grail, the current incarnation, is (imo) a liberal progressive masquerading as a leftist (a self-described "Anarcho-Antireal theorist" whatever the fuck that is). And I really don't think this qualifies as a "No true Scotsman" situation where it's arguable either way - it's immediately obvious from reading Their comment history.
I don't really want to rehash the extensive history of this user and Their alts in detail here, however I'm pretty sure long-term Lemmy users will be aware of at least some of these previous alt accounts, which have been almost universally banned. I'll try my best to summarize the issues below.
The case for defederation
Here's some recent examples/summaries of why the user is so problematic:
.
Recent examples of hating on / agitating against our instance:
The case against defederation
Warning
Please do not attempt to re-litigate the topic of xenogenders in this post. Such comments will be removed as off-topic. As an instance, our policy is to respect personal pronouns, whatever they are. This is not a referendum on the validity of xenogenders. The topic of the post is clear - whether or not we should defederate from the multiverse.soulism.net instance. If you want to bring your own experiences into the comments that is fine, but please keep them pertinent to whether or not we should defederate from this instance / user on the basis of Their problematic behaviours, not on the basis of Their identity or pronouns.
Instructions
The proposal is:
We should defederate from the multiverse.soulism.net instance due to an extensive history of trolling by the main admin's alts, and due to the admin being openly hostile to our instance.
Please upvote this post to vote for defederation. Downvote to remain federated. This proposal will require a 2/3 majority to pass.
P.S., Please be sure to use Grail's preferred pronouns of "capitalised They/Them", so we don't have to remove comments for misgendering.
Acknowledged governance topic opened by https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/u/flatworm7591 
This is a simple majority vote. The current tally is as follows:
This vote will complete in 6 days
Grail is nowhere near as annoying as Drag imho. However generally I really dislike sockjacketing people without solid evidence, like this. OTOH I do understand that trolls need to be dealt with summarily so avoid more damage to the communities. I just feel we don't need to try to connect them to previous trolls to do so.
I'm going to abstain from this one as I am not particularly bothered either way.
- Grail is neurodivergent (trans and NPD afaik), so we should be willing to make some accommodations for Their behaviour
It is an insult to every neurodivergent person who has their shit together, if you tolerate this sort of behavior just because they are βdifferentβ.
No tolerance for the intolerant. Defederate.
Flatwork7591: thank you very much for this very informative post and giving us the possibility to be heard.
As a trans and neurodivergent person myself I agree. Community standards need to be upheld, and people who are unsafe or harmful need to be removed.
what is your definition of intolerant here? I've seen some atrocious takes (multiple in this post tbh) but nothing I would consider truly intolerant...
(i promise this isn't sealioning, I'm sure I haven't seen the worst of it)
On one hand, yeah they can be really annoying.
On the other, all they're pretty much doing is talking about their voodoo reality shit (which often can be really funny) and politics in a way that's not too different from .world'ers.
I did interact with this user directly and while my experience with them was negative, completely disappearing them for a wrong kind of LARP that's already prevalent in other instances and sometimes being annoying seems way too extreme.
oh huh I didn't realize Grail was Drag but it tracks. i appreciated that Drag's pronouns made me think about pronouns in a way that they/them hasn't for a long time. that said, I can understand the people who felt it was "attack helicopter" adjacent (patently not the blatantly transphobic camp, and there were a lot of them)
I think They are harmless and defederating is too extreme. the crime of being annoying doesn't warrant excommunication, I think people can individually block if they find Them annoying (cool that Their pronouns make that sentence make sense in a way it wouldn't without the capitalization :P )
I think it would be reasonable to reassess this proposal if They started doing targeted harassment of our users or communities but I don't think They are.
also, I feel like a lot of the emotions involved here have more to do with the alts/priors than Grail Themself. have They specifically said anywhere that those are accounts They ran or is there some other definitive proof of those accounts all being the same person behind them?
I'm not doubting the connection, merely asking because if the accounts aren't definitely the same person I think that changes things
The only time I interacted with this user was when They went by the name of Drag. At the time, it was the 2024 US General Election, and They were a big pain in the ass. I might have blocked Them then and there because I don't recall seeing Them again on Lemmy, or any of Their aliases.
I have a brief snapshot of the user. They could be "normal" under any other context but politics, but I haven't seen it.
db0 has a clear charter that is fundamentally political in nature. I don't have any confidence that this user won't monolothize our instance and force things to be political, without giving any of our users the benefit of the doubt that they're their own individuals which happen to align on politics. And of course, we have to put in extra effort to accommodate Their neurodivergency - which isn't to say we shouldn't accommodate them. All genders deserve (digital) dignity, respect, and inclusion. Just because someone is divergent in their gender doesn't give them a blank check to withhold that same right to others. There is a social contract of tolerance here, regardless of the actors and however different those actors may be.
Another side of the conversation is what impact this person has on db0. If They're abusing their admin and mod powers on Their own instance, where people are free to post content according to the instance rules, what's to say that said content is given the same protections and said users are given the same rights and freedoms that we enjoy on db0? Is it within our power to protect those people from Drag or Grail or whichever name They go by? Are we the police of the Fediverse? I think db0 is the exact opposite. We allow freedom of thought, freedom of expression.
I guess the question is if this user and Their instance prevents db0 from carrying out that mission.
Still making up my mind myself!
Agreed with the case for this being more of a ban/block situation. If their establishment of an instance is used to evade bans and blocks, then defed.
No opinion on this question given itβs none of my business, but I love seeing these governance posts in action. I really admire the system you all have here and appreciate how level-headed they always seem to be rather than the lynch mob discussions like these have the potential to be
I agree with this. Really appreciate the community in these topics but I've never come across this user (and also don't care) so it's no use for me to vote on this.
Thanks a lot, that's great feedback.
personally i find they can be a bit groupthink-like though... not as in expression of dissent is socially suppressed, but as in expressed dissent on lynchmob topics is not objectively evaluated.
like in the replies to https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/63525728/24345496, an unfortunately quite emotional comment that does argue against some evidenceβreplies saying that the person they're replying to should dieβthe users who had already voted before the comment either 1. argue such replies have no problem since the person they're replying to are bad; or 2. repeat the claims said evidence were used to back up without presenting their own evidence.
That user was on our instance. It'd be worth saving yourselves the hassle and cutting ties.
That said I do understand the opposition to the motion and would ask one question pertaining to that instance and whether or not ( if I was a member here) I would vote for or vote abstain. That question is whether or not the grail-ran instance has open registration or if accounts have to be approved by the instance admins. If it's the former, I'd be in favor ( if I was a member here) of defed as a means of preventing additional bad actors alongside the original crew of bad actors from entering the scene through an open door. If it's the latter, I'd obstain and suggest others to simply utilize the block function as they see fit.
I mostly remember the controversy from the Exocrinus days and I am in support of defed. Cant believe this is getting hashed again.
Neurodivergence set aside, They are a terrible troll that never, ever argued in good faith on any topic I saw Them engage with, and was just a huge pain in the ass of normal users and mods alike. Use of a single-user instance without registration limits for the owner opens the door for infinite alt accounts that cannot be realistically banned or controlled using normal mod tools, without filtering the entire instance.
Also, as a neurodivergent myself, trying to lean on being different does NOT absolve a user of the consequences resulting from being a unrequited asshole trying to stir shit up. I'll respect Their pronouns for sure, but I'm still going to call Them a dick when They are being a dick. I understand needing to be diplomatic, Unruffled, but try not to carry too much water for the trolls.
last paragraph is super based. people deserve basic respect even if they are a dick, and also deserve to be called a dick if they are being a dick.
that said, I think your main argument is kinda a slippery slope fallacy. that's to say I think if we do end up having a flood of bad actors from this instance, we should poll this again with that as the reason why. i don't think defed because "They have the opportunity to flood bad actors" is reasonable, personally.
Is it really a slippery slope when its a slowly repeating pattern from a known bad actor?
being as I haven't seen any evidence that these are all the same person, very yes.
pretending for a moment that we're certain these are all the same person (I think it's likely) still yes. i see a young ND Trans person trying to find the identity that suits them much more than I see a malicious troll committing ban evasion, but maybe that's more me projecting than it is Them.
i think a vote if They end up doing that with "They are unbanning Themself" would easily pass, I don't think we need to do it preemptively
Edit: due to this discussion here I am changing my vote to a yes
I have to veto this one. I honestly feel users can handle it. Especially since this seems to pertain to a single user. Defederation to me is absolutely last ditch absolutely no hope left measure and I don't feel this calls for it yet. I still see that user engaging in good faith and normal activities outside of politics comms so they seem to just be a lib.
For context, the soulism instance is (for all practical purposes) a personal instance run by infamous fediverse "personality", Grail. Grail is suspected to be a recent alt of DroneRights aka HardlightCereal aka Exocrinous aka Dragon Rider aka Drag.
You forgot PM_ME_FAT_ENBIES
Ah yes, I thought there were more... π«‘
My experience with Grail was that They publicly expressed intent to brigade mine and similar communities as well as encouraged others to do the same and then decided to troll me in my DMs after I banned Them for it. I've also noticed they consistently promote electoralism and also engage in some really bad faith arguments and accusations, like conflating usage of AI with enslaving animals, which is pretty gross.
Since they're the only admin on Their instance I say defederate, we would defederate if some other random troll was hosting their instance and violating our rules. It shouldn't be different if a person is a troll who is also trans or neurodivergent, I say that as someone who is trans-NonBinary and neurodivergent myself.
well that is a much worse accusation than anything in the main post, do you have receipts of it?
no worries if you don't want to make them, but if substantiated that might be enough to convince me to defed
I looked through my private messages and only found one of the DMs, it's possible the others were deleted:
DM Trolling
I'm having trouble locating the comment where Grail advocated for downvote brigading, if I can locate it I will update my comment. I don't think it was removed because it would've shown in Their modlog.
I have a soft spot for both dragonfucker and Grail, so I'm biased. Idk about the other alts or what drama I've missed from them, but I haven't seen any evidence presented for these being the same user anyway.
I'm lowkey a bit of an antirealist myself, and I have to say Grail seems extremely consistent with Their belief system. Others see bad faith baiting, but I often see two people talking past one another. Have y'all checked out Their Medium articles and soulism website? I've read both thoroughly, and this all tracks and has remained consistent for a long time.
Yes, I agree that They're hardly an anarchist in the sense that most of us appreciate politically, I just don't think that's trolling but rather disagreeing (for the most part- obviously there's been drama).
I support starting with relevant community bans where rules are violated, and escalating as needed. The anti-AI sentiment might be a dealbreaker, but if They care that much They should just defed on Their end
Appreciate your comments Gary, and I was trying to channel you in the against section :p
That's a yes from me. I would prefer some concrete evidence linking these accounts to confirm ban evasion, but that would require some collaboration between instance admins to basically dox the person.
The general antagonistic nature, purity testing, lack of demonstrating any principles of anarchism tell me that this person is out to do just what they are doing, and whatever sort of reports that have been sent will keep being sent.
We owe new users some sort of safety in the community. If we expect everyone to be fully informed and capable of discerning bad actors from ignorant ones, that's not fair to them.
One person's neurodivergence is also not an excuse to distress others. Allowing that robs other people who may also be vulnerable from feeling safe, and gives the first person power over these other people.
So Grail had an argument in other instances and was apparently an ass, maybe a crybully, has a pragmatical approach to elections, and thinks dbzer0 is either turning tankie or rightwing (who cares? "agitating against our instance" lol I think you are taking lemmy too serious)... and... what else? I mean, the post doesn't suggest spamming, stalking and hateful attacks... what were the reports even about? Being annoying? Why these users are calling the cops instead of just blocking the person they find annoying? This post-social media behavior always amazes me...
I'm not voting because I'm indifferent to the matter, but I find it funny because I just came from a post that user is asking a community to ban content and here they are the one that might get banned lol
If a person is violating instance rules they get banned, if that person hosts their own server they get banned and their server gets blocked. No one would be having these reservations if it was any other old troll. Electoralism isn't annoying, it is against our community rules, bad-jacketing isn't annoying, it is against our community rules. These are things other people get banned from dbzer0 for, and server owners aren't any different except that they have the ability to spawn infinite accounts or clear their bans (when someone gets instance banned on their home instance, and then unbanned from their home instance it deletes all remote bans).
That's why defederation is on the table.
Have They actually done that though, spawned new accounts in order to ban evade? To me this stuff seems like it would make it appropriate to prevent Them posting on communities where it is a violation of the instance rules, but going too far to prevent everyone on the instance from seeing or interacting with Their posts elsewhere, especially since it removes the opportunity for argument. If the latter is the only way to enforce the former, fine, but that would depend on whether They are unwilling to respect Their ban.
I dislike Grail.
I dislike defederation more.
I dislike unsupported claims that multiple usernames are aliases of the same person even more.
I dislike the prospect of this instance moving into closer alignment with select other instances the most.
Against defed under the present circumstances.
Addendum: I do not agree that anyone else can compel my use of capital or lowercase.
all very reasonable before the addendum, you're being transphobic. the question of "would you be able to tell when spoken?" is moot because we're not speaking. we're on the internet where you can tell.
that's all to say, I appreciate your arguments that are relevant and not your transphobic irrelevant little nugget (that you were specifically asked not to attempt to relitigate) at the end
Your opinion about casing of letters and the meaning of such, the fundamental overlap between that and the broader dialog around communicating respectfully regarding gender - these cannot be meaningfully disentangled nor discussed in this comment thread or governance decision. Your points are made worse by your addendum.
You were asked politely in the post submission not to make those questions the focus here. You can of course do as you wish, to an important degree (important to me, I mean) your freedom counts. Nonetheless, I would see that as distracting from what aims to be a much narrower discussion and decision, and your own typing suggests you think so too.
Not much to defend with the addendum, let it go friend.
Addendum: I do not agree that anyone else can compel my use of capital or lowercase.
This isn't a good hill to die on, this is just encouraging misgendering. If someone asks you to use their preferred pronouns and that includes capitalization you kind of need to respect it or you're an asshole. Grail prefers people address Them with capitalized They/Them pronouns, you should respect Their wishes. Arguing against that isn't productive.
Disagree, on the basis that capital/lowercase do not inherently change a word. The word is still the same word, despite the case of the first (or any) letter. Spoken aloud, would there be any difference? Is there any way to discern the case of any part of the word in such a circumstance, or are they equivalent? Attempting to dictate case is, at best, performative.
That said, I typically don't refer to Grail at all. I see little benefit in doing so. I can't imagine many interactions that would enrich either party.
This, however, is not the place for discussion of such. It is a place to ponder defederation. As much as I dislike Grail and find prescriptive casing to be an exercise in ridiculosity, I do not see ample reason to persue defederation. As I understand it, the point has become halfway moot, as defed has occured from the other direction.
P.S., Please be sure to use Grail's preferred pronouns of "capitalised They/Them", so we don't have to remove comments for misgendering.
You were asked by our admin. It is not optional. This is not the time or place to debate the merit of people's pronouns or how much you think it matters, and you should not have added it to your comment in the first place. When someone asks you to respect preferred pronouns you do it without question, because it's a sign of basic human respect.
As I understand it, the point has become halfway moot, as defed has occured from the other direction.
Uh source? I just checked and we're still federated both sides.