@sheldrake This invitation has happened. If you follow the transparency log as well as comments I made below a post of the person.
@RyanLynnWells: I agree this is a difficult call and context is required and also in a geographic sense.
My judgement here was the one of a moderator that had such additional information “in context”: The specific profile has a history of posting out of context content, including a post I commented on in this topic. In the real post no black bars were not present…
In my opinion the profile was testing “what is possible” and also test the borders between “freedom of speech” and “freedom of attention”.
Lacking any contextual information removing the lingerie post is clearly border line. With additional information I felt compelled that the post was “spammy”, “not adding value”, “testing the limits”.
As we evolve Ethereum world we need to look at several aspects:
- We need to continue to have meta discussion and evolve the Code of Conduct and Values this community stands for.
- We need to continue to ask ourselves what brings value to the community and what not and how we can both help participants to filter to content that they find valuable as well as agree what content is generally falling into the “valuable” and not "valuable category.
In the longer term future I would believe such instances of the AKASHA Framework to become more specialized and combine moderation and curation in a way that clearly defines what a world shall be focussed at and what not.
Today, with only one world there’s no place to go. But in the future the lingerie posts may simply move to a lingerie channel, or better a lingerie world.