Discord has expanded its Hateful Conduct Policy to explicitly include prohibitions against misgendering and deadnaming in a policy update. Accompanying this policy update, Discord has also implemented a comprehensive warning system to enforce these guidelines effectively.

    • blaine@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      No screeching. Just a sad realization that our 1st Amendment rights will slowly be whittled away by big-tech censorship. All while the unsophisticated masses (excited at the thought of a short-term culture war victory) cheer along the restriction of free expression.

      • squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        96
        ·
        1 year ago

        Everybody knows that these claims are bullshit. “1st Amendment rights” is the biggest dog whistle for bigots that they claim whenever their disrespectful conduct has consequences. You don’t give a flying fuck about other people’s “1st Amendment rights” when it isn’t your racist, sexist or transphobic friends. Otherwise you’d be up in arms against book bans, but your kind cheers for them and every other effort to silence people you don’t like.

        • blaine@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          @squirrel

          @rtxn

          I’m actually a fairly progressive Bernie Sanders voter. I agree with Jon Stewart that the best cure for hate speech or more speech, rather than censorship. I am also against book bans for what it’s worth.

          • rtxn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            49
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Regardless of your claimed allegiance, your interpretation of 1A is still incorrect.

            As a private entity, Discord is allowed to decide what content it permits and what it prohibits on its own platform. Especially in the case of online harrassment, a “let’s talk it out” attitude will get you nowhere.

          • squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            47
            ·
            1 year ago

            Honestly, I don’t care what you think you are. When you react to the news that there are consequences for transphobia with Fox News-style whining about the end of “freeze peach”, says pretty much everything anyone needs to know about you: You are a hypocrite who is A-OK with transphobia, bullying and harassment, but attempts to hide the obvious behind a veneer of plausible deniability, ie. the usual slew of right-wing talking points. John Stewart, my ass.

      • rtxn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        93
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There it is.

        1A is irrelevant, it only protects against censorship by the government. Discord is a private entity, they can do whatever the hell they want on the platform they own. They aren’t obligated to host your opinions, and neither are conservative outlets obligated to host liberal opinions. Get it right next time.

      • Nikki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        57
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        dont even need to read past the first line, how many times do i have to say this for anyone like you to get it in your head

        THE FIRST AMENDMENT ONLY PROTECTS YOU FROM GOVERNMENT SILENCING

        no, discord, the private chat service, that you must agree to their terms to use is not a government service. they can ban you for whatever they fuck they want, and are not liable.

      • Bo7a@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just a reminder. What private companies do has nothing to do with your first amendment rights.

        Grow up or shut up.

      • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        46
        ·
        1 year ago

        Please detail to me how discord, a private company, banning people who intentionally misgender or dead name others is a violation or the first amendment right in the United States?

        It doesn’t say ‘intentionally’ as you’ve pointed out, but the wording is clear and pretty reinforced throughout the article, just below the following quote in the article is another 3 ‘targeted’ explanations:

        “The update explicitly addresses behaviors considered violations of its hate speech policy, including targeted misgendering and deadnaming of transgender individuals.”

        You can’t say bomb in an airplane. You can’t shout fire in a building. You can’t shout removed in a Walmart. No one’s saying you can’t THINK whatever you feel like and SAY whatever you want in your own spaces, but you don’t own discord or the plane or the building or the Walmart so you gotta follow other people’s rules. Woe is you

          • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Turns out the homophobic slur that shares similarities to British cigarettes is banned from use here or on the client side, not sure which. Which, I’m fine with, just using it to make a point on what “censorship” looks like.

            • Kedly@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              WHY IS LEMMY OPPRESSING THOSE OF US WHO LIKE OUR BUNDLES OF STICKS?

      • CluelessLemmyng@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        41
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are already protections for bullying on Internet platforms. Intentionally misgendering is a form of bullying.

        The right to life should supercede someone’s right to free speech to undermine said life.

      • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just once in my life, i would like an American to actually know what the first amendment to the US constitution actually says.

        • First Majestic Comet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Kbin.social is a very poorly moderated Server, so the worst of the worst users tend to congregate there, and it’s a general purpose instance which is the face of Kbin so many instances will choose not to defederate it which would hurt the Kbin project.

          • loki@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            yeah, the admin creating kbin is the only one interesting there. other than that, it’s just a place to subscribe to lemmy communities. Not much activity happening on its own.

            • First Majestic Comet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yeah pretty much, even that isn’t very good, since the community had to step in and make Mbin because the Kbin dev wasn’t working on it or merging requests and the project was starting to fall behind because of it. Plus it ended up having some serious vulnerabilities like not federating mod actions and just federation in general which isn’t great and undermines its whole purpose as a federated forum. Even its killer feature Mastodon/Microblog integration didn’t and to my knowledge still doesn’t work properly.

        • unexpectedteapot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Regardless of the first amendment rights or US law, centralised unfree communication silos do govern more information than government.

          The claim that private corporations shouldn’t be subjected to the same ethical scrutiny (i.e: freedom of speech) as governments is invalidated once only very few people are exposed to other forms of communications than what these private corporations control.

          That being said, I am glad Discord is explictly banning the most obvious forms of transphobia. I will remind the privilaged white people here that none of these rules actually apply to most users on these platforms. Just go to any language or region where they won’t/can’t get sued or bad press.

      • LZamperini@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        Big tech censorship? I mean the police are using pretty big tech to make sure only one side can protest safely. 1st amendment amirite.

      • Anemone@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        Actually cry about it they just enumerated what they meant by harassment and this makes the rules explicitly more clear and not up to interpretation and abuse.

      • First Majestic Comet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I won’t deny that Big Tech and Media companies do undermine our freedom in many ways (things like weaponizing copyright and anti-repair or anti-circumvention laws), but this isn’t an example of that, this is just Discord expanding on rules against hate speech and harassment which they already were against.