Hey all — just launched openmic.social, a general-purpose Lemmy instance with a specific mission: free speech + transparent, restorative moderation.
The pitch is simple — anyone can grab the mic — and the thing that makes us different is what happens when you cross a line:
- No shadowbans, ever. If your post is removed or your account is actioned, you’re told — what happened, which rule, and how to fix it.
- We help before we punish. A heads-up and a path back come before a ban. Bans are the last resort, not the first reflex.
- Moderation in the open. Every call is appealable, publicly, in our
!metacommunity. - Hard lines only: nothing illegal, no targeted harassment, no doxxing, no spam. That’s what keeps the mic open for everyone.
We’re brand new, which means early adopters shape the culture. Come introduce yourself, bring a community that needs a home, or start one — I’ll help you set it up and mod it.
This post about a new Lemmy instance is on topic for this community. You can all have your own feelings about this instance and what it’s trying to do, but a single post here announcing it isn’t spam.
Please stop reporting this post and OP’s comments.
You might have been expecting the response you got here, or you might not have. I know I learnt more about nazi/hate speech dogwhistles in my first few weeks as a Lemmy admin than I had learnt in all my life up to that point 😅.
I also know in those early days there were people worried my instance was a “free speech” instance because I wanted open conversations instead of bans. Mostly I think I didn’t appreciate how big of a problem it was, and for sure I had people registered on my instance expecting it was a “free speech” instance. There are people out there looking for a place to spout their hate and many think Lemmy is the place for it because it’s advertised as censorship resistant.
Please know that there is a strong belief (among both nazis and anti-nazis) that indicating a place as being able to speak your mind is a dog whistle for allowing hate speech. Over time if you find you aren’t attracting the right kind of members, you may need to tweak your wording. But also please know that the idea of supporting people to be better community members instead of flat out banning people does work for many members, because many people just don’t realise that what they are saying is harmful. Some people will be operating in bad faith though, and it’s typically the same small number of people that keep getting banned. Because you have open registrations, these users are more likely to come to your instance.
It’s also important to understand that the Fediverse is full of users that have felt unsafe on mainstream social media. Your rules against hate speech need to be strictly enforced, of you’ll find yourself isolated in the Fediverse as no one will want to federate with you.
Thanks! This is by far the most constructive comment I have gotten and truly appreciate it. I’m learning and always will adjust as needed. I’m open to constructive criticism and more importantly any insight others who have done this can provide. The immediate assumptions about me and my goals were at best amusing and not at all constructive however, somewhat unsurprising to be honest.
Openmic makes me think there will be audio.
There are development plans
So if I wanted to start a pro-nazi community there, you would permit that?
I’m a nazi. You’re a nazi.
Illegal where? Criticism of Israel is illegal in Germany, for example.
How do they square that with freedom of speech or like, defenses of fact?
Like how defense of fact is a valid defense against libel laws since the speech at issue was based on known facts or “truth”
There are laws and case law that make criticism of Israel harder than in other places. Post WW2 pro-Nazi and antisemetic speech was basically declared hate speech. Courts have taken a narrow view of what counts as antisemetic. There are in excess of six million reasons for that hard swing in the other direction.
So I would say the long version is this: you can criticize Israel but you need to pay close attention to how you say it. Criticizing the existence of the Jewish state is possible as well but you need to weigh your words even more carefully.
Moderators on an internet forum may take an even narrower approach to avoid any sort of legal trouble. And thus continues a chilling effect.
Freedom of speech is a tricky subject. Post WW2 the US had the influence to export their constitutional values, such as a first amendment, to Japan and West Germany. In both cases they punted. It’s not without some irony when I say opinions on how to establish freedom of speech in a democratic constitution vary.
It is illegal in Australia as well, where anti-israel/anti-zionism/anti-genocide has been remarketed as anti-semitism.
Potential 2 year prison sentence for saying ‘from the river to the sea’ in one of the Australian states.
You don’t like when people defend themselves?
Quit your bullshit.
Fuck Israel. Israel is a fascist state that commits a suicide in Gaza. I am a German in Germany and I just critiziced Israel. I even used bad language. That is not illegal so don’t spread lies if you don’t know shit about the laws a country has.
Regarding your "example’: That’s new to me, being a German. in this broad way the statement is wrong, i suppose. ChatGPT confirmed this. there is no law denying the right of Israel to exist. It is only true that German politics has ever since Second World War felt a historical responsibility to support Israel against antisemitism.
And who made you a god?
Will your management of the instance be as low effort as your introductory post that you obviously didn’t write yourself?
can I interest you in a spaceship to mars soon?
Personally? No. But please take everybody you can.
Great, wish you the best, but if anything gets illegal is federated to mine that’s where I have to defederate. One admin to another wish you luck though.
Thank you.
This either already is or will become a hotbed for rightwing pieces of shit.
Thank you! Don’t hesitate to reach out if I am missing anything, I definitely don’t want anything illegal happening. I am looking for more mods and admin a to help out as well! Appreciate the kind words!
Do you allow Nazi like ideologies like Zionism?
We’re all Zionist.
No we are not. I don’t support ethnic cleansing and I, do not believe in any race being superior to another unlike Zionism
The best zionists are the ones who deny it.
Spread your fire and ire.
Let’s dance while the world burns.
There is no good Zionists
Then you have no hope. Sad.
It sad that people do not understand that Zionism is a supremacist genocidal ideology
Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
The property owners will come over to our side. According to my conception, the majority of the local population will have to be transferred elsewhere.
We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country. - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
You can’t even define Zionism properly.
Lover of lies.
Fair questions — you deserve a direct answer: No. A pro-Nazi community wouldn’t be allowed here, and neither is racism, transphobia, or misogyny — “aimed broadly” or not. I in no way support hate.
“Free speech” here means something specific: we don’t shadowban, we tell you exactly which rule you broke and give you a path to fix it, and we won’t remove you for an unpopular opinion or a hard argument made in good faith. It does not mean a license to dehumanize people for who they are. Bigotry isn’t brave dissent — it’s harassment with a wider target, and it drives out the very people who make a place worth being in.
If drawing that line costs us the crowd who think “free speech” means “slurs welcome” — good. They were never the point. The mic’s open to everyone; it’s not a megaphone for hate. Be a good human. It isn’t hard. You can debate your point with out dehumanizing others, when you can’t, you’ve already lost the argument.
“Free speech” here means something specific: we don’t shadowban
Shadowbanning has nothing to do with speech. I’d recommend you reconsider your verbiage.
we won’t remove you for an unpopular opinion
Most instances already don’t do that. Which leads me to believe you have unpopular (hateful) opinions and want to create a community where those opinions are welcomed.
Be a good human. It isn’t hard.
No, and yet many people fail to. And these are the types who will be attracted to your community.
You can debate your point with out dehumanizing others, when you can’t, you’ve already lost the argument.
No. You can’t. And giving a “open mic“ to the Nick Fuenteses and Stephen Millers, and Charlie Kirks of the world who will put on a suit and a tie and try to “debate” you while dehumanizing others with nice sounding words gives them a platform to spread their hate while framing it as a “civilized debate“ rather than the coded bigotry that it is, while you cast aside any responsibility for letting them do it, tossing your hands up and claiming “free speech”.
It’s plainly and obviously bullshit. It’s like inviting a vampire into the house and then being surprised when everyone turns up dead.
If you say so…
I’m clearly not the only one here who feels this way, and I’m sure that none of us are surprised that, right from the start, you’re deflecting any responsibility for what you’ve created.
Sounds like you’ll have an interesting time moderating trolls and their endless respawns. Shadowbanning has its troublesome aspects even conceptually, but it was invented for a reason.
Possibly. We will see.
shaddowbanning is pathetic and lazy.
