Along with prohibiting reviews written by nonhumans, the FTC’s rule also forbids companies from paying for either positive or negative reviews to falsely boost or denigrate a product. It also forbids marketers from exaggerating their own influence by, for example, paying for bots to inflate their follower count.

Violations of the rule could result in fines being issued for each violation, according to the rule. This means that for an e-commerce site with hundreds of thousands of reviews, penalties for fake or manipulated reviews could quickly add up.

i've been a little busy and by the time i noticed i'd missed the date again i was like "it just makes more sense to wait until Monday to keep the thread on schedule and useful"--not much sense in having one up for three days tbh

Mutual aid groups established themselves across Sudan after the war erupted. They drew members from a vibrant pro-democracy movement and brought ideas rooted in a rich heritage of social solidarity, best represented in the tradition of nafeer (“a call to mobilize”).

The Greater Khartoum kitchens follow two different models. Under the takaya system, religious and community leaders feed people on the streets, in houses, or under trees; however, more structured kitchens are run in defined spaces by the emergency response rooms.

Hassan, who helps coordinate assistance across Greater Khartoum, said over 350 communal kitchens have been set up, assisting 500,000 families with at least one meal a day. “We aim to save people’s dignity,” he said. “Everybody should be able to eat and not feel shame. We, as Sudanese, are still helping each other. We survive together.”

there’s certainly other things we can do to tackle racism, but tackling ground level stuff like inherently painting black as bad and/or negative is part of that.

i simply do not think that this is racist or worth caring about unless you make it (at which point i would argue yet again the problem is internalized, not with the phrasing used), and i think this is reflected in how the overwhelming majority of people who care about this are white people who want to feel good about themselves without doing anything that would actually tackle racism at the source or challenge their whiteness and how they might benefit from it. to me "whitelist/blacklist" is extremely representative of contemporary slacktivism--stuff that feels good but is functionally a red herring toward material progress on these issues. (notice, for instance, how much time we're wasting on even debating if this is valuable when we could be doing anything else. and how we're doing this in a thread where some people are just unambiguously being racist.)

see: "i think if you can only racialize this verbiage when you hear it that’s weirdness on your part." and again i think this very much people wanting to die on an unimportant hill that they can feel sanctimonious/virtue-signally about and scold people about instead of tackling actual manifestations of racism in the tech field.

i cannot stress this enough: if people want to address something that materially affects black people and other minorities in tech, that should probably start with the omnipresent discriminatory hiring practices and normalized racism--not terminology that requires racialization to be problematic. (and it should probably start with not checking actual black people's opinions on this subject like they're the reason any of this is a problem!)

You don’t have to play rap music and apologize for slavery to make them feel welcome.

i'll preserve this quote for people who disagree that the OP's post is needed, or who think there isn't racism on the Fediverse. it's insane how many of you are demonstrating the point.

there is no phrasing to be redone; it's the official wording, i am decidedly not a person offended by the whitelist/blacklist terminology, and i think if you can only racialize this verbiage when you hear it that's weirdness on your part. i'm sure there are some people who have problems with it, but i genuinely don't know that i've ever--as a black person--thought for a second about this outside of white people getting offended on my behalf. certainly not when online spaces struggle with so much actual racism, ignorance, and dismissiveness of those prior two things (as has been on display in this thread).

Again, what you’re saying here is radically different than what OP is saying in the 4 points they posted. There was nothing limiting it to “on discussions about being black”.

i am demographically one of the people OP is trying to be considerate of (a black nonbinary person)--so i think i have a better idea of what they're going for here than you. to say nothing of the fact that you're an off-instance poster who, just to be clear for any observers, analogized the idea of paying attention to any demographic information for any reason to fascist genocides. ("Better yet we can skip that and simply put demographic badges next to people's username, like a yellow star for Jewish people, a pink triangle for homosexuals, and... hm, that sounds familiar, where has that happened before?")

anyways this is not interesting to me and i think we've established that you are one of the reasons lists like this need to exist, which is the only reason i waded in here to begin with--one of the community mods has already given you a ban for your conduct in this thread and the admins are in agreement that this should be extended sitewide.

to be clear, your argument here is:

1. you can't know the race, sex, gender identity, or other immutable characteristic of every person who posts on Lemmy or another service, so
2. you therefore can't listen to those voices when they identify themselves or clearly mark themselves as such; you can't pre-emptively think about the nature of what you post and whether it's harmful to such groups; you can't report or check harmful behavior from others against those groups; and you can't support initiatives led by these groups? -- these are just entirely non-applicable in this space?

i feel like if you can't see how obviously ridiculous and farcical this argument is, you're again the person who vindicates the need for a list like this--however objectionable you find it.

I always thought of beehaw as an inclusive instance.

most of the issue is and has always been off-instance users, who for a variety of reasons (some intentional, some because of UI/user experience/just plain unawareness due to the nuances of federation) tend to respond to threads like these in ways that our on-instance users don't. to combat this we may or may not switch to a whitelist in the future instead of a blacklist, which is what we have now; if that occurs, it will probably be when we move to Sublinks

there are difficulties but bluntly: these are only "unworkable" if you're dismissive (as your comment here is) and/or make absolutely no effort to make them work. you are largely vindicating the need for such a list.

this level of bloodthirst and dehumanization is not acceptable