Statement on IFTAS’ Ethical Commitments & Community Relationships
IFTAS was founded to support trust and safety across decentralised social media networks.
We are guided by a commitment to ethical governance, transparency, and the protection of marginalised and underserved communities online.
Our work centres evidence-based practices, civil speech, and the creation of safer, more equitable spaces in federated platforms.
We want to clearly reaffirm: IFTAS does not tolerate violent threats, harassment, or hate speech of any kind.
Over the past week, we have received messages requesting clarity on various activities. For the record:
- IFTAS does not tolerate intolerance,
- IFTAS does not tolerate misgendering or deadnaming,
- IFTAS does not moderate the Fediverse,
- IFTAS has no organisational ties to any third-party denylists, including The Bad Space project,
- IFTAS has no organisational ties to the FediForum event,
- IFTAS has no organisational ties to Nivenly,
- IFTAS has one employee,
- IFTAS does not publish any denylist that blocks entire portions of marginalised communities,
- IFTAS has a permissive linking policy, and this will change.
We expand on each of these statements below.
Our Focus
Our focus is on supporting informed, contextualised decision-making – never on enforcing top-down rules or creating centralised controls. We encourage transparent moderation practices and community-specific policies that reflect local values and safety needs. We solicit input from the community, and then convene and work with any and all who have elected to engage with our community, subject to our community participation guidelines.
We remain committed to our mission and to the communities we serve. We will not be deterred from this work by those seeking to distract or divide. The safety and dignity of marginalised people remains at the core of all we do.
IFTAS does not tolerate intolerance.
Our Community Participation Guidelines describes the conduct we expect from our community members when engaged with IFTAS, representing IFTAS, or in IFTAS spaces.
IFTAS does not tolerate misgendering or deadnaming.
As can be evidenced by our work in this area, we are proud to have been a part of the advocacy that moved over 50 providers to explicitly prohibit targeted misgendering, deadnaming, as well as promotion or endorsement of so-called “conversion therapy”.
IFTAS does not moderate the Fediverse.
We convene and support the people who moderate content and behaviour online. We ask the moderator community what they most need help with, and we use the results of that survey to determine what IFTAS should work on. IFTAS moderates its own spaces. We do not moderate any third-party instances, and we do not expect nor demand that our community members moderate their instance(s) in any particular way. Any tools we build take the needs of the service administrator first, and leave all moderation decisions up to the service administrator. We advocate for civil speech, inclusivity, and equitable approaches. We can, by definition, only work with the people who engage with us. We do not seek to become a centralising authority, but we do seek to convene and find common ground where appropriate to reduce burden on moderators, to share the load, and to spread best practice.
IFTAS has no organisational ties to any third-party denylists, including The Bad Space project.
As part of our library of resources, IFTAS links to a range of denylist resources to be investigated by decentralised service providers, moderators, and community leaders, including a project called The Bad Space, which is a catalogue of observed federation policies based on the aggregation of findings made by nine instances. The current publicly listed sources are rage.love, queer.group, indiepocalypse.social, blackqueer.life, queer.garden, mastodon.art, solarpunk.moe, colorid.es, and cathode.church.
As best as can be seen from the project web site, the catalogue of domains for The Bad Space is openly collected, organised, and published. The project is maintained and hosted by heuristic instruments. The project lead is not a participant in any IFTAS activity.
IFTAS has no organisational ties to any of the third-party denylists listed on our Library page and does not endorse or recommend any third-party denylists.
IFTAS has no organisational ties to the FediForum event.
We attend, we often conduct a session or two, and we listen and learn from what others in the space are doing. We sponsor tickets for moderators, seeking to bring a diverse set of voices to the event. We use this event to advocate for trust and safety for minority and marginalised groups, and to highlight issues we believe the platform and app developers that attend should be aware of.
When we learned of transphobic social media posts made by one of the organisers, we were horrified, as was anyone we knew who was also considering attending. We would not have attended had it gone ahead with the organiser in place, but the event’s other organiser quickly removed the organiser who made the problematic posts from the event, and pivoted to a listening session, cancelling the usual activities. We applaud this approach and have pledged to work with new governance of the event to help create a safer, more diverse space.
IFTAS has no organisational ties to Nivenly.
While we are supportive of the organisation, we have never funded them, we are peer entities that exist in the same space. Once, IFTAS executive director Jaz-Michael King was asked to review and comment on a proposal titled “FSEP” funded by Nivenly. He was not paid. He reviewed the document, he commented on the document, but it was up to the author to take those comments on board or not.
IFTAS has one employee.
IFTAS is predominantly volunteer-driven. One full time, unpaid volunteer performs all administrative work; a volunteer non-profit board oversees the compliance, financials and legal requirements of operating a non-profit; and a group of volunteer advisors offer their expertise as and when available. From time to time, IFTAS has hired sub-contractors to perform specific scopes of work.
At one time, IFTAS attempted to create a small cadre of moderators to react to our work. We offered an honorarium-type stipend, specifically to ensure the group was diverse and not asked to provide free labour. Part of our non-profit mission is to support the uncompensated labour provided by the hardworking moderator community. The individuals that participated in this short-lived project were never employees, nor sub-contractors, although some did request and receive the honorarium. This group partially met once, and it proved to be a non-starter, no further meetings were held. No work of any kind was ever achieved, and later that year one participant was removed from IFTAS spaces after making deeply inappropriate public remarks, conduct that contravened our Community Participation Guidelines.
IFTAS does not publish any denylist that blocks entire portions of marginalised communities.
Our block recommendations and data are entirely public, transparent, and human-reviewed. No third-party list ever became an IFTAS resource.
IFTAS publishes three resources with regard to federating domains.
- A Do Not Interact list. This is an importable list that recommends blocking 72 domains (at time of writing). Each domain has been reviewed and labelled by IFTAS, no-one else. Each domain is highly recommended for defederation due to risk of service abuse, intolerant hateful conduct, or illegal content.
- A Domain Observatory. This is not a denylist, it cannot be imported, it is a database that describes what domains are blocked by the largest, most active Mastodon service providers.
- IFTAS occasionally publishes alerts for Fediverse service providers which may include a domain block recommendation. All these alerts can be reviewed at https://mastodon.iftas.org/@sw_isac
Various Fediverse admins have reached out to IFTAS over the past year to request we remove them from our denylists, having been misinformed that IFTAS is in some way responsible for their domain being on one or more third-party denylists. In all cases, we had not blocked or recommended blocking the domain(s).
We have, however, received persistent abuse and harassment from the domains we do recommend blocking.
IFTAS has a permissive linking policy, and this will change
IFTAS currently lists a wide range of tools, research, and third-party resources submitted by members of the community for the benefit of all moderators and administrators. However, we also recognise that inclusion in our resource library may be interpreted as endorsement or affiliation even when we state otherwise. IFTAS will begin consulting with community members and advisors on what actions we may need to take to review our approach.
We acknowledge that not all of our decisions will satisfy every party, and we respect the right to engage in principled disagreement. However, targeted harassment of IFTAS volunteers – who are often marginalised individuals themselves – crosses a boundary. IFTAS volunteers are not public figures. We ask that any criticism of our organisation or its work be directed through appropriate channels. Our community spaces are designed for collaboration, learning, and respectful disagreement. Our communications channels are the best way to reach IFTAS directly – our email is contact@iftas.org and our fediverse address is
@iftas
IFTAS was founded to make governance and moderation tooling and resources available to the communities who need and request them, and that’s what we’re still working on. Our next blog post will walk through the activities and projects we’re putting front and center for the rest of 2025. We wrote this post to clarify our orientation toward our work, the resources we list, the communities and organizations we work alongside, and the actions we’ve taken when people inside IFTAS spaces have behaved in unacceptable ways.