Multiple accounts. It's somewhat unfortunate, but in a public ecosystem like the fediverse, it's pretty much a requirement to compartmentalize separate aspects of your personality. Particularly if you dare to hold different opinions on different things that don't align with majority social groups of people.
Honestly, not writing this from some dedicated "introspection" account, already makes me slightly uncomfortable 😐
When a cross-instance user posts to a lemmy.world community, or participates in a LW-hosted post, then the Terms of Service keeps its enforce-ability.
Since we both know how federation works, and asking for a boost from an LW's community user ("posting to a Lemmy.world community") involves an active use of LW (does it?)... broadcasting up/down votes or boosts to LW, does also constitute "active use of lemmy.world", or doesn't constitute "access to and active use of lemmy.world"?
Can a federated user get banned for up/down voting or boosting the wrong content on LW? Can it be for interacting with wrong content hosted on a federated instance that actively forwards the interaction to LW because some other LW user happens to be subscribed to the federated community?
By accessing or using the website, you and the entity you are authorized to represent (“user” “you” or “your”) signify your agreement to be bound by the Terms of Service.
BTW, many legislations require an explicit acceptance of the Terms of Use as a "legal document", making that part either meaningless or illegal. How is it in the case of LW's "Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the Republic of Finland Suomen"?
In a federated system, the relevant part is each instance CAN have different rules. If you don't like one set, or consider it "not good", then go to an instance with a different set, or start your own.
I know perfectly well how federation works. The core of my questions have nothing to do with federation, they're about people and how they'll #### rules to death.
But since you brought it up: you may want to also consider the implications of mods from federated instances making decisions about content on LW communities.
What are user rights?
Anything that's not restricted?
As I said, if you want to establish this as a legal document (often called "Terms of Service")... then you may really want to check with a lawyer on that.
And if you have an issue with humans moderating, oh well, good luck.
Maybe I wasn't clear; this isn't about me having an issue, this is about you missing a few issues. Take it or leave it, I have no stake in this.
I swear there was discussion about hiding faves coming from lemmy... guess they decided not to. At least you can still follow people and see who else is following them... 🤦
But seriously, what is the point of all of this? It only seems to overcomplicate things. Now a user will have to:
Follow the ToS
Follow the CoC
Follow whatever rules a community's sidebar states
Match whichever mod's interpretation of all the above
In that order, or any other order? I see nothing about protesting the breach of the ToS by either the CoC or some community, or some community's mod... so which supersedes which?
How is this going to be communicated to users commenting/posting from other instances? Or is this only applicable to users registered on this instance? In which case, what is going to be applicable to federated users?
What are the user's rights?
Users Responsibilities: 4.x
Our Rights: 6.x
Users Rights: none?
If you want to establish this as a legal document, then you're missing at least a section.
If this is about giving as many reasons as possible to remove/ban content/users, it's all unnecessary, just say "mods can remove/ban whatever"; it's a private instance, you can do that.
If this is about having a ruleset that protects the users from arbitrary mod decisions... I see none of that in there.
An instance doesn't have to follow, or show, the content from all the instances it's federated with. If you chose to do so, that's your choice, there is likely another "kids friendly" Lemmy federation split on the horizon.
Checked on that, it's a 2K€ minimum community service, they take the body, cremate, then dump the ashes into a common pit, no extras. Next of kin are still supposed to pay the 2K€ "when their economy improves" (basically if you're earning anything above minimum wage, then you're on the hook).
Also if your loved one dies at home, "refusing the body" is not really an option, you want the body out ASAP before it stinks the whole place (had my mom for a day, took a couple weeks to get rid of the smell).
Here in Spain, you "are legally allowed to use a pinewood casket or just a shroud"... at the same time as "only a funeral home is allowed to perform a cremation or burial"... and they all refuse to do businesses with you unless you also pay for a much pricier casket and some extra services.
All the proof shows a parking lot with fewer than 10 cars on fire, surrounded by a hospital that's still standing and usable, and maybe a dozen dead (there might be more, there is no proof of them yet).
Sure, they can. And people can point out it's the instance owner's choice.