iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Open on Bluesky →

Replies

Frank Hightower 🐁 @frankhghtwr.bsky.social · 14/08/2025

These people were clearly not paying attention during the FA debacle earlier this year.

4.A.i.d. Prohibition against changing handles. Also impracticable. This one is clearly not a bad idea, but how are enforcers going to differentiate between people who are just changing their handles to comply with 4.B.ii. and people who are actualy trying to sell their names?

Are there any important guidelines or areas related to user safety that you believe are missing or underrepresented?
Please specify and explain your concern.

2.B.i.b. It appears your solution to minorities' concerns is "don't ask, don't tell" if you're a minority. This is a terrible solution as the real-world "don't ask, don't tell" policy already showed! This further shows tone-deafness in how bluesky communities have been built since many of them have used these "protected characterstics" as things around which to form, well, communities! You can do better and HAVE done better! Do you even realize what "protected" means?

And no, 3.A.ii. is not sufficient.

2.C.ii.b. Internationally-recognized art. Where exactly is the line here? The rule appears to be specifically targeted at allowing valentines-day cherubs, but would, for example, the Pokémon short where the Pichu Brothers get bruised up (and any derivative works) qualify? It checks all the boxes in 2.A! They're both minors and animals and they "earned" it in the context of the short, so it can very clearly be argued to be "glorifying violence" against them, narrative intent be damned! And that's before we start to ask if there's a limit to its "derivativeness". This is a messy exception to a messy rule. Again, you already HAD a rule that covered what you meant, there was no point in changing it!

4.A.i.b. Prohibition against roleplaying as minors in sexual contexts. This rule is unenforceable for the reasons I have already stated above: being able to identify a fictional character as a minor, or being able to identify a situation as "romanticized", always leads to too many false-positives. Again, the rule against CSAM expressed your original intent much better.

4.B.ii. Exception for accounts of fictional characters. This rule is impracticable unless multiple accounts can be registered with the same e-mail address (which might require changing the AT Protocol itself!). Further, the fact that new accounts get the new rules slammed on them immediately, while existing accounts get an adjustment period de-incentivizes doing this. It is also overly restrictive since it doesn't allow for accidentally posting through the author's account as the character or through the characters' account as the author (which DOES happen to ANYBODY who has such an account scheme! Forcing this on everybody seems, to put it mildly, ill-advised)

Frank Hightower 🐁 @frankhghtwr.bsky.social · 14/08/2025

I am very disappointed in Bluesky right now.

Broader Moderation and Safety Concerns:
Beyond the guidelines themselves, are there broader moderation or safety concerns that Bluesky should address?
Please specify and explain your concern.

It is alarming that you changed ALL the rules but are only taking feedback on the community guidelines, especially when you've just removed any mention of parents from the terms of service.

Since this question is about moderation, it is also alarming that in the terms of service you say you will "act swiftly" but make no mention of whether you will review the merits of the case. This indicates that you will remove anything anyone asks you to remove, making the notification system ripe for abuse by any single malicious actor.

It is further alarming that the new terms of service only indicate EU/EEA members have the right to appeal moderation decisions on individual posts, when this was previously a right extended to all users.

Any other comments or feedback you would like to provide:
The new clauses in the privacy policy indicating personally identifiable information may be shared if necessary to "enforce contracts" or if "professional advisors" deem it "necessary" do not instill confidence

The Rocket Knight @sparkster2600.bsky.social · 27/08/2025

Can I just copy this into my own submission since I really don’t know how to word this stuff?

100