Add receipts for a new instance

See https://fosstodon.org/@gotofritz/110869804488136249

content/posts/fediverse-blocklists.gmi

@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
+This article is out of sync with the Web version. The Web version is the canonical version:
+=> https://seirdy.one/posts/2023/05/02/fediverse-blocklists/ Web version of this article.
+
 I moderate the "pleroma.envs.net" Akkoma instance on the Fediverse:
 => https://pleroma.envs.net/Seirdy My Fediverse profile: @Seirdy@pleroma.envs.net
 

content/posts/fediverse-blocklists.md

@@ -41,17 +41,17 @@ This post is an attempt to document how they are made, their differences, their
 
 ## How Tier-0 and FediNuke work
 
-[My tier-0 list](https://seirdy.one/pb/tier0.csv) (mirrored to `tier0.csv` in [the Oliphant repository](https://codeberg.org/oliphant/blocklists)) is a subset of the `pleroma.envs.net` blocklist. It contains entries that appeared on at least **11 out of 20** other hand-picked instance blocklists ("bias sources"), with exceptions detailed below. Not all Tier-0 entries have the same level of severity; a smaller list containing what I personally deem the "worse half" of Tier 0 is [FediNuke.txt](https://seirdy.one/pb/FediNuke.txt). **Consensus** builds Tier-0; **severity** builds FediNuke.
+[My tier-0 list](https://seirdy.one/pb/tier0.csv) (mirrored to `tier0.csv` in [the Oliphant repository](https://codeberg.org/oliphant/blocklists)) is a subset of the `pleroma.envs.net` blocklist. It contains entries that appeared on at least **13 out of 24** other hand-picked instance blocklists ("bias sources"), with exceptions detailed below. Not all Tier-0 entries have the same level of severity; a smaller list containing what I personally deem the "worse half" of Tier 0 is [FediNuke.txt](https://seirdy.one/pb/FediNuke.txt). **Consensus** builds Tier-0; **severity** builds FediNuke.
 
-When I add a bias source, I may also increase the minimum number of votes required if I find that its blocklist is too close to (or mainly just imports all of) tier-0 or the blocklist of a bias source's blocklist. That's the reason why the threshold is 11 instead of 10.
+When I add a bias source, I may also increase the minimum number of votes required if I find that its blocklist is too close to (or mainly just imports all of) tier-0 or the blocklist of a bias source's blocklist. That's the reason why the threshold is 13 instead of 12.
 
 All entries use the root domains when applicable, or are as close to the root domain as possible without triggering false-positives.
 
 ### Overrides
 
-There were some block-overrides for instances with fewer than 11 votes. Here's how I went about overriding:
+There were some block-overrides for instances with fewer than 13 votes. Here's how I went about overriding:
 
-- If an instance has **10 votes,** I may elect to add it after additional review instead of waiting for it to hit 11 votes. It still has 50% consensus at that point.
+- If an instance has **11 votes,** I may elect to add it after additional review instead of waiting for it to hit 13 votes.
 - If an instance is run by **the same staff as another Tier-0 instance** and has **at least 5 votes,** I may add it after asking other admins about it and getting multiple thumbs-up from admins who import tier-0.
 - If an instance contains **blatant/unapologetic bigotry** (something really undeniable, like Nazi imagery or excessive use of slurs in violent/hateful/definitely-not-reclaimed contexts) with staff approval or involvement, I may add it to both tier-0 and `FediNuke.txt` after I get multiple thumbs-up.
 - If an instance becomes **risky even to many tier-0 instances** (untagged gore, dox attempts, significant cybersecurity risk, <abbr title="child sexual exploitation material">CSEM</abbr>, etc. with staff approval or involvement): I may add it to both right away, skipping any process.
@@ -78,6 +78,10 @@ If `tier0.csv` were merely an unbiased list of the most widely blocked instances
 
 Some instances migrate their domains. If the old instance was already deemed worthy of a suspension and the new instance maintains the same staff with no visible attempt to change its reputation, then I deem the new location to be as block-worthy as the old location and make an override. It's the same bad actors under a different banner.
 
+### Refreshing
+
+**Refreshes are a manual process.** Refreshes update my tier-0 list, but do not update FediNuke; that list is a manually-curated subset of my tier-0 list. Every time I refresh, I get prompted with changes (if they exist) so I can review them. Since my tier-0 is a subset of the `pleroma.envs.net` blocklist, all additions should have some level of approval from me already, but I've started giving new additions a second look anyway. Manual review, subsetting the `pleroma.envs.net` blocklist, having a large number of bias sources, and some level of vetting for my bias sources should mitigate the risk of one bias source "going rogue" and compromising its blocklist right before a refresh.
+
 ### Retractions
 
 A separate list exists for retractions from my tier0.csv list. I don't add entries to my retractions list when I remove dead instances, or when an admin on a removed instance prefers not to be included in it (some wish to remain less prominent).
@@ -123,7 +127,7 @@ Importing `FediNuke.txt` and then individually importing `tier0.csv` entries aft
 
 Another option is to use some text-processing tools to find entries that are common between Tier-0 and another trusted instance's blocklist. You can import the overlap.
 
-Finally, you could just do something else entirely. I never use "your blocklist is different from mine" as a block-reason; even "totally open federation" is never the sole reason for `pleroma.envs.net` suspending an instance. Suspending instances for not using my own blocklist feels wrong.
+Finally, you could just do something else entirely. I never use "your blocklist is different from mine" as a block-reason; even "totally open federation" is never the sole reason for `pleroma.envs.net` suspending an instance. Suspending instances for not using my own blocklist feels wrong; it'd turn these lists into a source of authority and cross the line from moderation to cop behavior.
 
 Before you decide to trust one of my lists, please read the "Mistakes made" section.
 
@@ -170,10 +174,18 @@ Some supplementary blocklists I maintain with very different criteria:
 
 The following are receipts for instances on my blocklists. Read the text surrounding a link before navigating to it, and let that context serve as a content-warning. No links point directly to the blocked instance; all go to a third-party archiving service.
 
-Receipts are biased towards patterns in staff behavior or pervasive patterns among users with staff approval, as that generally won't be solved with a federated report. A one-off user action taken out of context, without any sign of staff endorsement, isn't enough to end up on one of these lists because it's not indicative of an instance's moderation policies. The one exception is receipts for legally risky media: I don't publish receipts for those, but it should be easy to verify them if you need to.
-
 I use archive links instead of screenshots. Screenshots pose accessibility issues, can be doctored, and are easy to take out of context.
 
+### Receipt criteria
+
+Receipts are biased towards patterns in staff behavior or pervasive patterns among users with staff approval, as that generally won't be solved with a federated report. A one-off user action taken out of context, without any sign of staff endorsement, isn't enough to end up on one of these lists because it's not indicative of an instance's moderation policies.
+
+Receipts revolving around slur usage depend on context. Slurs used in reclaimed contexts aren't grounds for defederation. Patterns of slur usage in discriminatory contexts would warrant adding a receipt. I'm a native English speaker, so I mainly consider English slurs. I give the benefit of doubt to users who aren't native English speakers when using English slurs, depending on context. When I'm unsure, I ask for feedback from other mods from the relevant marginalized group.
+
+Some receipts aren't reasons to block, but exist to contextualize other receipts. For example: I may mention that an instance has open-registration only to highlight that the instance's moderation policies will allow additional bad actors in the future.
+
+One exception is receipts for legally risky media (e.g. sexual depictions of minors): I don't publish archive links for those. It should be easy to verify them yourself if you need to; I'll provide a user handle if necessary.
+
 <details open=""><summary>Toggle receipts</summary>
 
 ### FediNuke entries
@@ -181,7 +193,7 @@ I use archive links instead of screenshots. Screenshots pose accessibility issue
 Criteria for a good FediNuke receipt is stricter than the aforementioned criteria:
 
 - Reblogs are only significant if they are from a staff member and are boosting local users. They are mentioned alongside other receipts to indicate that the content in question is permitted by staff.
-- Each instance must have multiple receipts.
+- Each instance must have multiple receipts. I'm working towards getting at least three receipts for most instances.
 - For larger instances: receipts must show staff behavior, or show consistent behavior from several users.
 
 **This section is a work-in-progress,** and it will grow with time.
@@ -408,8 +420,9 @@ narrativerry.xyz
 : Admin posts [blatant anti-Indian racism](https://web.archive.org/web/20230808151934/https://pleroma.narrativerry.xyz/notice/AY8awZ3lCW2pXp6TWi).
 : Admin [combines antisemitic conspiracy theories, homophobia, and racism in a slur-filled thread](https://web.archive.org/web/20230808153236/https://annihilation.social/notice/AXyTzERY59CX89mqn2).
 
-needs.vodka
+shortstacksran.ch OR needs.vodka
 : Admin [posts ethno-fascist harassment](https://web.archive.org/web/20230731171924/https://needs.vodka/notice/AYEXL71RuRXt1MYkSG), [antisemitism](https://web.archive.org/web/20230731172003/https://needs.vodka/notice/AYE2Y0GlEONjGKO8dk). Supports [racist, misogynistic, violent grooming](https://web.archive.org/web/20230731172555/https://needs.vodka/notice/AYAgwij0ohSdci6UjI).
+: shortstacksran.ch is the continuation of squid.kids and shortstackran.ch (note the extra "s"), by the same admin. [See prior FediBlock post](https://pleroma.envs.net/notice/ARU20uCgVwHeewEm6S). On the new instance, the admin posts [extremely racist use of slurs](https://web.archive.org/web/20230811200737/https://shortstacksran.ch/notice/AYbjnyIOQ5ZYOpQtaC), and [racist antisemitism](https://web.archive.org/web/20230811200824/https://shortstacksran.ch/notice/AYbeUcILUiKOtOMWVE).
 
 nicecrew.digital
 : [Blatant anti-Black racism from staff](https://web.archive.org/web/20230731154105/https://nicecrew.digital/notice/AT5UuihBpC4ZI8xIlk), [anti-Black racist caricature from staff](https://web.archive.org/web/20230731153949/https://nicecrew.digital/notice/AYCsMzQsKax7qc0b1E). [Antisemitic COVIDspiracy from staff](https://web.archive.org/web/20230731160204/https://nicecrew.digital/notice/AY4YmRWar1CMk4usOO).
@@ -526,6 +539,8 @@ crlf.ninja
 : Instance admin [endorses sending toxic racist slurs and being "horrible"](https://thechimp.zone/notice/AYGJJeBPdUXSuC7Fui) to people for blocking instances. Admin [participated in a transphobic dogpiling campaign](https://web.archive.org/web/20230730231641/https://ryona.agency/notice/AY8AHumTq4cb2lik76). [Admin publicizes blocks](https://archive.ph/hASVN).
 
 federated.fun
+
+
 wikileaks2.org
 : [Blatant transphobia from admin](https://web.archive.org/web/20230731162711/https://federated.fun/notice/AX46KDxhSkSNkxbSvw). Admin profile [pinned an extremely transphobic post](https://web.archive.org/web/20230805061250/https://ryona.agency/notice/AYMq4VFzPr2yEcvG3k).
 : Admin [switched to running misinformation.wikileaks2.org instead](https://web.archive.org/web/20230810182335/https://misinformation.wikileaks2.org/notice/AYVR3y1faCJhhpwhjk).