PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction· 2026Q2

Understanding Community-Level Blocklists in Decentralized Social Media

Owen Xingjian Zhang, Sohyeon Hwang, Yuhan Liu, Manoel Horta Ribeiro et al.

Short summary

Mastodon moderators use community-level blocklists with varied goals and criteria, balancing safety with concerns about false positives, according to content analysis and interviews with 12 moderators.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Mastodon moderators employ community-level blocklists with diverse goals, inclusion criteria, and transparency levels.
  • Moderators balance proactive safety, reactive moderation, and caution against false positives when using blocklists.
  • Interviews revealed moderator-identified challenges and suggested design improvements, including comment receipts and category filters.
  • The study highlights the fragmented infrastructure of decentralized moderation and moderators' hybrid strategies.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Community-level blocklists are key to content moderation practices in decentralized social media. These blocklists enable moderators to prevent other communities, such as those acting in bad faith, from interacting with their own—and, if shared publicly, warn others about communities worth blocking. Prior work has examined blocklists in centralized social media, noting their potential for collective moderation outcomes, but has focused on blocklists as individual-level tools. To understand how moderators perceive and utilize community-level blocklists and what additional support they may need, we examine social media communities that run Mastodon, an open-source microblogging software built on the ActivityPub protocol. We conducted (1) content analysis of the community-level blocklist ecosystem, and (2) semi-structured interviews with twelve Mastodon moderators. Our content analysis revealed wide variation in blocklist goals, inclusion criteria, and transparency. Interviews showed that moderators balance proactive safety, reactive practices, and caution about false positives when using blocklists for moderation. They noted challenges and limitations in current blocklist use, suggesting design improvements like comment receipts, category filters, and collaborative voting. We discuss the fragmented and opaque infrastructure of decentralized moderation, highlighting the hybrid strategies moderators use to navigate high-stakes defederation. We conclude by identifying key socio-technical challenges—such as trust and safety paradoxes—that future collaborative tools must address.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Artificial Intelligence

Artificial IntelligenceComputer Science