this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
722 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

60082 readers
3382 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] turtle@lemm.ee 25 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Careful, in case you haven't heard, discussing jury nullification is apparently against the rules of lemmy.world. SMH (at lemmy.world admins).

[–] zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

The pinned post on lemmy.world right now clarifies that discussing jury nullification for crimes that have already happened, such as this, is perfectly acceptable. It's only discussing it with respect to crimes which have not yet been committed which is against the TOS.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Wait, we got a Future Crimes Division? I didn't know .world was run by a bunch of milky precogs...

[–] SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you plan some violence and include jury nullification as some viable part of the plan, and publish that shit online, not only is it kind of useless and lousy opsec, but it will attract heat that is unwanted and unnecessary. It's literally a conspiracy to undermine nullification at that point, like a false flag. So no, don't do that, and I back the mods on this.

[–] turtle@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you trust them after having enforced an unwritten policy and still not allowing discussion of something that's perfectly legal.

[–] zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I do. They're cool.

[–] nepenthes@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

What the Multivac?!

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not sure that's true. I've had plenty of comments stay up. My guess is either the mod team got their shit together or those comments were deleted for other reasons.

[–] turtle@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago

It seems that it was never written in their terms before and had been inconsistently applied, but just in case you hadn't seen these:

https://lemm.ee/post/49117816

https://lemm.ee/post/49305452

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 2 weeks ago

They are certainly empowered to do that, just as I am empowered to block any instance I don't want to participate in. If they are not tolerant and respectful of my beliefs (even if they don't share them) then I don't want to contribute to their community either.

Layperson juries are a fundamental component of criminal justice. The law exists to serve the people, not the lawyers, not the government. Rejecting jurors for understanding the purpose of having a layperson jury fundamentally violates the rights of the accused in particular, and society in general.