:verified_2:防空識別區𝒔𝒐𝒄𝟶:redstar: on Nostr: Wrote about this 2 days ago. Appears today that this instance is now on the Oliphant ...

Wrote about this 2 days ago. Appears today that this instance is now on the Oliphant "tier 0" block-list ("[r]equires 60-80% consensus on blocks to appear on this list"). For reference, soc0.outrnat.nl is, effectively, a single-use instance at the moment. I am virtually the sole inhabitant. Regardless, I maintain a robust terms of service which I hold myself to, I widely defederate from hostile or offensive instances, I'm a pretty open leftist, and I don't tolerate hateful rhetoric or harmful content here. I have regularly described the content curation objective here to prune the Fediverse into a comfortable, constructive, friendly environment.

Additionally, I know my inclusion on these block-lists is wholly inorganic, not only due to the laughable logic surrounding "algorithmic" block-lists (detailed in the quoted post), but, also, because I can trace the original blocks that started the ball rolling on this Fediverse butterfly-effect: pleroma.envs.net, cathode.church, and mastodon.art.

These 3 hostile instances blocked this instance almost immediately, and they did it by blocking the top-domain, not the sub-domain: outrnat.nl. Anyone who would have come across this instance and found the content objectionable or harmful would, one would think, organically block this instance's sub-domain: soc0.outrnat.nl; Right? Not the top-domain, which isn't a Fediverse instance. Instead, what I've seen is that the 3 bad actor instances listed above blocked the top-domain here in quick succession (it only takes 1 for others to immediately and blindly follow).

What happened then is others, also, quickly and blindly followed suit. I cannot find any instances blocking the soc0.outrnat.nl sub-domain, but there are now plenty blocking the top-domain, outrnat.nl. Why? Because they saw it blocked by an instance and followed along. What happens then? Others see it blocked by an instance and follow along. Like a feedback-loop this festers and grows. Then, these major, centralized, "algorithmic" block-lists decide that, "algorithmically", due to a certain "consensus" of block-happy instances they reference, an instance must merit inclusion on their "tier 0", "worst of the worst" list! This just further accelerates the feedback-loop, as others blindly adopt these centralized block-lists, because, surely, these major block-lists would have definitely vetted and investigated the instances they've included on their lists, right? They're trustworthy! Etc. etc..

#Fediblock is a fucking cancer.

RE: https://soc0.outrnat.nl/notes/9k1bohd10k

quoting
note15jj…z897

These "algorithmic" block-lists don't make any sense because instances that Mastodon (​:mastodont:​), collectively, blocks, aren't blocked independently based on reason.

Rather, a singular Mastodon instance will publicly block an instance, and, thereafter, said instance will become communally blocked by Mastodon entirely solely due to being included on that original block.

These "algorithmic" block-lists are a pointless and inoperable "improvement" to the #fediblock process as, given enough time, any instance that gets added to a single block-list will inevitable become blocked thereafter by so many other Mastodon instances as to cross the threshold, or "event horizon", for inclusion on these larger "algorithmic" block-lists (like "Oliphant", e.g.). ---So, it doesn't even matter. It's a song and a dance, nothing more.

The problem with block-lists are the very existence of block-lists. There is no room for "improving" or "fixing" this process outside of complete abolishment and rejection by the community of #fediblock, the internet-cop culture surrounding it, and the mechanisms that enable it.