Self made content moderation

I like Lainchan content moderation, it's permissive enough without being a mess full of n*azis and p*edos like 4chan or endchan, but can this be achieved in a large scale social network like Mastodon? I'm trying to get out of Facebook but it seems most Mastodon instances are too extreme in both ways, too permissive or too strict, I'm almost fully into open source now (took me 6 years), but going to Mastodon seems boring, there isn't fun content. With this in mind I thought "is it possible to make an Mastodon instance where all users moderate their own content?". In this model every user would need to create their own content filter, like a firewall, the only restriction would be properly tagging content and not uploading illegal content. What are your thoughts on it? Could this model work?

asking users to tag their own contents is begging for a mess of inconsistencies. One man's tasteful lewds is another man's pornography is another man's comfy anime picture of the day (and then you've got the trolls and the spammers who will deliberately not tag correctly). Asking people to be moderators (tagging everyone elses soykaf) is ok arguably but will most likely expose everyone who doesn't want to see nsfw soykaf to seeing nsfw soykaf from time to time (and then you've got the people who will deliberately mistag items just for the lulz). Even lainchan which does a pretty good job exposes every regular visitor to cheese pizza on a no less than monthly basis. I like the basic principal but its going to be tough to impliment without a highly cooperative community. Good luck and heil Hitler.

Mastodon is based on Activity Pub and i dont think there's a reasonable way to tag things in it and be interoperable with other existing Mastodon instances that's workable. You could force the use hashtags but that takes up limited post characters. I don't think such a system would reduce moderation workload, either. Enforcing correct tag usage is difficult - think about how many times people post threads to the wrong board, for example, and that's much less complicated than a tag based rule system. Even places which require only tagging NSFW content end up with people constantly forgetting, or intentionally leaving out, the tag. Another human factor is that a lot of rules are enforced because people don't want it on the instance at all, whether they see it or not. For example, a "don't dox people unless you use the dox tag" rule doesn't address why people want doxing derezzed. And some tags would just be self-defeating. Using lainchan's rules for example, nobody is going to tag their post as arguing in bad faith or trolling.

>>78712 >no one is going to tag their posts are arguing in bad faith I would, just to troll people

Self-moderation depends on honesty/responsibility, and in edge cases it depends on clarity. But what about peer moderation, or primary self-moderation confirmed by peer moderation? Even the issue of category nuance could be smoothed using the confirmation of trusted peers. (of the content consumer)

>>78711 >Asking people to be moderators (tagging everyone elses soykaf) is ok arguably Bluesky is currently experimenting with a moderation system that's like this. Users subscribe to a third-party labeling service (a bot) and start seeing labels on posts and accounts. This, of course, immediately erupted into that plume of social discord we might know as 'drama': moderators from one of the more popular third-party labellers abused the system for personal reasons and the service was disbanded. But drama is unimportant, and moderation is always messy. The idea has potential, although Bluesky itself doesn't seem confident in it. The site has started derezzing users themselves, and the community is still largely duking it out over whether the l0lic0ns should be kicked off. I'm there because the underlying AT protocol is interesting. But I will warn the site and its users seem too preoccupied with the usual semantics of Being A Platform On The Internet to realize the protocol is decentralized enough to abandon that model entirely. Or maybe it's tautology that 300-character posts give way to the usual Twitter-isms.