That would be one of those mandatory blacklists to which I referred. And now I’m repeating myself.

Just say, “bwaaaah! I don’t like it” and be done with it.

Bye.

It would be present on a guy’s computer and the network would block any communication with him. I think that’s as good as it gets.

I think you’re dead wrong there. I think that everybody hates being told what they can say and who they can talk to.

If the cp is blacklisted then it will be removed from the listverse.

“It would be bad” and “it isn’t how it’s supposed to work” are not substantial arguments.

Your naysaying is repetitive and insubstantial. Sorry.

Perhaps focus on a single argument and back it up a bit more.

We’d have a default list available, optionally pre-installed. But this is obvious.

Yes, That is addressable via this mechanism as well.

It’s simply another way of doing a forum. A better way.

I have not seen a forum that does it this way. Do you have a link to it or a failed experiment?

There are other ways to get the list than manually creating it. You could get it from a friend or a list providing service. Or both. All or in part. And then optionally tweak it later.

By providing a way to filter spam, trolls and whatever else you like, without the need for a central authority.

It’s a bit more than that but ya, it’s pretty simple and tested technology. But of course the magic is in the network.

About the same as lemmy I guess. The gov will always be an issue

Ya, something like that. There would be a government man with an account, keeping an eye out. Updating the gov black list as necessary.

How are legal mandates handled in lemmy presently?

See details on that “development” to which I referred, elsewhere in this thread.

However you slice it, if mandates are handed down by the legal authorities, this is the form (black lists, added to local lists, informing filters) it would probably take.

The Democratic system of forum management to which I refer would work basically like this.

You choose who to speak to. You keep a list. Rating, flagging and tagging other forum members. (as opposed to having it done for you by a moderator)

This list can be something that you personally create. It can also be gotten from a friend or somebody who’s opinion you respect. It could be provided as a service, thus emulating the role of moderator. It could also be dictated to you, in the case of legally forbidden stuff. The list that you use might be the sum of several lists, tweaked over time to suit you.

(One term I’ve heard for this is “a system of silos”. Though I don’t really get the reference.)

It’s an idea that’s going around.

You sound like a serf arguing for the need for kings

It’s a democratic way of judging posts. Democracy is good.

Developed further, voting could replace moderators. I’d like to see that happen.

Do away with moderators. Nobody should tell a bunch of peoole how to talk.

Except in the case of spam and trolls of course.

This isn’t really a question.