Hey all — just launched openmic.social, a general-purpose Lemmy instance with a specific mission: open discourse + transparent, restorative moderation.

The pitch is simple — anyone can grab the mic — and the thing that makes us different is what happens when you cross a line:

  • No shadowbans, ever. If your post is removed or your account is actioned, you’re told — what happened, which rule, and how to fix it.
  • We help before we punish. A heads-up and a path back come before a ban. Bans are the last resort, not the first reflex.
  • Moderation in the open. Every call is appealable, publicly, in our !meta community.
  • Hard lines only: nothing illegal, no targeted harassment, no doxxing, no spam. That’s what keeps the mic open for everyone.

We’re brand new, which means early adopters shape the culture. Come introduce yourself, bring a community that needs a home, or start one — I’ll help you set it up and mod it.

🎤 https://openmic.social/

  • eurodyne@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    It has been my experience that “free speech” (especially online) is code for “bigotry welcome”.

    I see nothing in the description here to convince me this will be any different.

    • phil@openmic.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      No definitely not trying to allow bigotry. You are definitely entitled to feel that way though.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Then it’s not “free speech and anything legal is cool”

        Like, it’s not a bad thing to ban bigotry, that’s a good thing…

        Which is why when you said it was “free speech”…

        Everyone called you out for, either:

        1. Lying

        2. Allowing bigotry

        There’s only those two options buddy…

      • eurodyne@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        But it doesn’t appear that you’re specifically disallowing it either

        You are definitely entitled to feel that way though.

        My concern is that this is what you will also say to the bigots when they arrive

        When you sit down at a table and nine Nazis sit down at that table with you, there are now 10 Nazis sitting at that table.

  • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 hours ago

    So, transphobia, racism, misogyny, all acceptable as long as it’s aimed broadly, and doesn’t become targeted harassment of an individual?

    • phil@openmic.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      On the reverse of that, if you want to promote the opposite you are more than welcome to, free speech is a two way street. I don’t really tolerate hate though. Maybe I’ll update our description.

    • phil@openmic.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      40 minutes ago

      Fair question, and have sat thinking about answering it changed my mind about the wording I am using.

      What I actually built is due process, not a speech policy — no shadowbans, you’re told which rule you broke, warnings before bans, public appeals. That came from getting shadowbanned off Reddit for advertising my own business with no notice and no recourse.

      “Free speech” was the wrong description for that and I’ve pulled it from the description. The line I’m drawing: you can argue an unpopular position here without being removed for it, but you can’t dehumanize people for who they are. Bigotry isn’t dissent — it drives out the people who make a place worth being in. I personally want OpenMic to be welcoming to others, with out the disenfranchising hate, or destructive speech. It’ll be there, it’ll happen and I’ll do my best to clean it up. I can promise one thing I learned a long time ago is we can all find something to disagree about, and we can easily come up with reasons to hate one another. Thats not very interesting and makes life not fun.

      So while I appreciate your question (part of me thinks it had ulterior motives and was more of a trap, this thread is full of it) I think my use of free speech may have been misguided. I also teach my kids regularly that while you have freedom of speech, you don’t have freedom of consequences because of that speech.

      I am human, I am learning as I go, I am definitely not perfect. I am however willing to learn and improve.

      • phil@openmic.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        34 minutes ago

        Also, in full transparency. You won’t find me in debates or discourse about much of the “hot topics” or the “footgun topics” Politics, Religion, etc. They frankly rarely produce any meaningful output or outcome and often devolve into circular arguments and hate on both sides of an issue. I personally am far more interested in technical discussions, engineering discussions, and business discussions.

  • adr1an@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Lemmy has bans, no shadowbans. There’s no recommender algorithm to make the “shadow” part. Or mod tool to edit votes. I believe you are using incorrectly the term. Please clarify. A ban is a ban. Shadowban is no ban per se, but from there on you post to /dev/null in whichever platform has support for that shit (i.e. meta)

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Lemmy has bans, no shadowbans.

      Multiple instances and even an app has built in blocks.

      Instead of looking up a profile and seeing “banned” you get an error. Instead of seeing an an entry in the modlog, it’s literally baked into the code.

      • mrdown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        No we are not. I don’t support ethnic cleansing and I, do not believe in any race being superior to another unlike Zionism

        • Pennywise@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          The best zionists are the ones who deny it.

          Spread your fire and ire.

          Let’s dance while the world burns.

              • mrdown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                54 minutes ago

                It sad that people do not understand that Zionism is a supremacist genocidal ideology

                Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895

                The property owners will come over to our side. According to my conception, the majority of the local population will have to be transferred elsewhere.

                We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country. - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895

                Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895

  • eleijeep@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Will your management of the instance be as low effort as your introductory post that you obviously didn’t write yourself?

  • frongt@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Illegal where? Criticism of Israel is illegal in Germany, for example.

    • eremophila@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It is illegal in Australia as well, where anti-israel/anti-zionism/anti-genocide has been remarketed as anti-semitism.

      Potential 2 year prison sentence for saying ‘from the river to the sea’ in one of the Australian states.

    • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      How do they square that with freedom of speech or like, defenses of fact?

      Like how defense of fact is a valid defense against libel laws since the speech at issue was based on known facts or “truth”

      • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        56 minutes ago

        There are laws and case law that make criticism of Israel harder than in other places. Post WW2 pro-Nazi and antisemetic speech was basically declared hate speech. Courts have taken a narrow view of what counts as antisemetic. There are in excess of six million reasons for that hard swing in the other direction.

        So I would say the long version is this: you can criticize Israel but you need to pay close attention to how you say it. Criticizing the existence of the Jewish state is possible as well but you need to weigh your words even more carefully.

        Moderators on an internet forum may take an even narrower approach to avoid any sort of legal trouble. And thus continues a chilling effect.

        Freedom of speech is a tricky subject. Post WW2 the US had the influence to export their constitutional values, such as a first amendment, to Japan and West Germany. In both cases they punted. It’s not without some irony when I say opinions on how to establish freedom of speech in a democratic constitution vary.

    • lokalhorst@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Quit your bullshit.

      Fuck Israel. Israel is a fascist state that commits a suicide in Gaza. I am a German in Germany and I just critiziced Israel. I even used bad language. That is not illegal so don’t spread lies if you don’t know shit about the laws a country has.

  • phil@openmic.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I also took these comments to heart and made some updates to our sidebar. I appreciate anyone who wants to participate in good faith, I started this because Reddit shadow banned me simply for trying to advertise my business. They didn’t even give me an opportunity to make things right, and it was a honest mistake. I think thats a really crappy thing to do to people. I don’t want to participate in that.

  • phil@openmic.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Fair questions — you deserve a direct answer: No. A pro-Nazi community wouldn’t be allowed here, and neither is racism, transphobia, or misogyny — “aimed broadly” or not. I in no way support hate.

    “Free speech” here means something specific: we don’t shadowban, we tell you exactly which rule you broke and give you a path to fix it, and we won’t remove you for an unpopular opinion or a hard argument made in good faith. It does not mean a license to dehumanize people for who they are. Bigotry isn’t brave dissent — it’s harassment with a wider target, and it drives out the very people who make a place worth being in.

    If drawing that line costs us the crowd who think “free speech” means “slurs welcome” — good. They were never the point. The mic’s open to everyone; it’s not a megaphone for hate. Be a good human. It isn’t hard. You can debate your point with out dehumanizing others, when you can’t, you’ve already lost the argument.

    • eurodyne@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 minutes ago

      You can debate your point with out dehumanizing others, when you can’t, you’ve already lost the argument.

      No. You can’t. And giving a “open mic“ to the Nick Fuenteses and Stephen Millers, and Charlie Kirks of the world who will put on a suit and a tie and try to “debate” you while dehumanizing others with nice sounding words gives them a platform to spread their hate while framing it as a “civilized debate“ rather than the coded bigotry that it is, while you cast aside any responsibility for letting them do it, tossing your hands up and claiming “free speech”.

      It’s plainly and obviously bullshit. It’s like inviting a vampire into the house and then being surprised when everyone turns up dead.

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      “Free speech” here means something specific: we don’t shadowban

      Shadowbanning has nothing to do with speech. I’d recommend you reconsider your verbiage.

      we won’t remove you for an unpopular opinion

      Most instances already don’t do that. Which leads me to believe you have unpopular (hateful) opinions and want to create a community where those opinions are welcomed.

      Be a good human. It isn’t hard.

      No, and yet many people fail to. And these are the types who will be attracted to your community.

  • solrize@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Sounds like you’ll have an interesting time moderating trolls and their endless respawns. Shadowbanning has its troublesome aspects even conceptually, but it was invented for a reason.