this post was submitted on 04 May 2026
288 points (90.7% liked)

Fediverse

41887 readers
792 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I recently discovered that some popular federated instances have been using LLM-assisted moderation tooling that evaluates whether someone has said something bannable. They do this by running a script/app that sends the user’s comment history to OpenAI with the question “analyze this content for evidence of specific political ideology sentiment. Also identify any related political ideology tropes“. (The italic bits are where I've redacted the ideology they're seeking).

OpenAI’s LLM (they’re using GPT-5.3-mini) then responds with something like:

image

and so on, hundreds of comments.

I have not named the instances or people involved, to give them time to consider the results of this discussion, make any corrective changes they want and disclose their practices at their own pace and in their own way. I have also redacted the evidence to avoid personal attacks and dogpiling. Let’s focus on the system, not the individuals involved. Today these instances and people are using it and maybe we’re ok with that because it’s being used by groups we agree with but what if people we strongly disagree with used it on their instances tomorrow?

The use and existence of this tooling raises a lot of other questions too.

What are the risks? Fedi moderators are often unsupervised, untrained volunteers and these are powerful tools.

What safeguards do we need?

Would asking a LLM “please evaluate this person’s political opinions” give different results than “find evidence we can use to ban them” (as used in the cases I’ve seen)?

What are our transparency expectations?

Is this acceptable and normal?

Should this tooling be disclosed? (it was not – should it have been?)

If you were given a choice, would you have opted out of it?

Can we opt out?

Are there GDPR implications? Privacy implications? Should these tools be described in a privacy policy?

Are private messages being scanned and sent to OpenAI?

How long should these assessments be retained and can we request to see it, or ask for it to be deleted?

Once the user’s comments are sent to OpenAI, is it used to train their models?

What will the effect be on our discourse and culture if people know they are being politically profiled?

Where are the lines between normal moderation assistance tools, political profiling and opaque 3rd-party data processing?

I hope that by chewing over these questions we can begin to establish some norms and expectations around this technology. The fediverse doesn’t have any centralized enforcement so we need discussions like this to develop an awareness of what people want in terms of disclosure, privacy, consent and acceptable use. Then people can make choices about which instances they join and which ones they interact with remotely.

And of course there are the other issues with LLMs relating to environmental sustainability, erosion of worker’s rights, increasing the cost of living and on and on. I can’t see PieFed adding any functionality like this anytime soon. But it’s happening out there anyway so now we need to talk about it.

What do you make of this?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0ops@piefed.zip 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

You're hyperfocusing on one point, as if that's the only part that matters and ignoring all the rest. I don't consider that helpful, hence the downvote.

Huh? What exactly are your expectations here, that everybody addresses every point in every comment? You just listed like 2 dozen points of discussion in the op, every comment would be an essay. Scrubbles has a good point that should honestly be foundational to the discussion, and they're being respectful, so I really don't understand what your problem is here.

If you really wanted their take on your other points, instead of downvoting you could've just asked for it. You know, have a discussion? Or just let it stand alone, it's still a valid take.

What is especially unhelpful is abusing your admin access to call out people's votes. Leave that shit alone.

Anyone (anyone) can be an admin of their own instance, there's absolutely nothing exclusive about it. Hell you don't even have to go through the work of doing that, there's other tools. Lemmy/Piefed are super open, by design.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Anyone (anyone) can be an admin of their own instance, there’s absolutely nothing exclusive about it. Hell you don’t even have to go through the work of doing that, there’s other tools. Lemmy/Piefed are super open, by design.

And any admin can ban someone or defederate from someone’s instance for doing it.

Lemmy/Piefed are super open, by design.

If Lemmy could have kept the votes hidden, it would have, but the nature of federation precludes it. So instead is does the best it can to not make them obvious. In the case of lemvotes.org, lemmy.ml is defederated from it so that it doesn’t have access to our votes.