Coz the thing is, the "third-party".. "users can report abuse to" will immediately become corrupted.

Especially since they will need to be funded.

You can have a marketplace of censors, but that will be hard to stop free-riding, I can just copy the blocklist.

I think it would have to be some kind of delegated trust, with a network of weights between all the nodes more than some overseer service, even a marketplace of them.

@blaine

@youronlyone @gsora absolutely. This is a really good example of why we need sophisticated folks who can evaluate these sorts of attacks and make the right call.

It's unreasonable to expect admins of small instances to be able to do this themselves.

@blaine @darius I like a lot of this idea. Like there’s currently a lot of duplicated labor that goes in through stuff like the fediblock hashtag. A lot of stuff that is just obviously wretched and should be blocked ends up taking attention from a ton of mods. I think the issue is when you get into tougher call territory. Or even worse things which are super polarizing.

Anti black racism is one such issue that’s been super polarizing on fedi. A lot of white folks want to be very dismissive of it when they see it and instead react with hostility. How does this third party service deal with that issue? Either they’ll have to play along and ignore the anti black racism too or they’ll risk being ignored by those instances (which is sadly a lot of them) that don’t want to grapple with the issue.

@blaine The instinct the centralize is common but I find it surprising from you.

Some sort of web-of-trust distributed thing is what the infrastructure needs. I'll trust instance B as much as my trust in A times my trust in it's trust.