SaidIt Survey: Ban /u/socks and /u/ActuallyNot or keep them around?

submitted by JasonCarswell from (self.AskSaidIt)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 6 fun10 insightful - 5 fun11 insightful - 6 fun -  (19 children)

No matter how you feel about someone, they could surprise you with some insightful things to say. Disagreements can get out of hand on here, but that all depends on how much emotional work is going into it. That said, no. Both have posted some pain in the ass comments imo, but restrictions on their ability to post because of even escalated disagreements is stupid. We don't want our speech restricted, so why would we impose that on someone else simply because we don't like what they have to say or piss us off with their argument methods?

[–]soundsituation 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (18 children)

Okay, I'm curious: do you feel the same way about paid influencers? I agree with everything you said when it comes to free agents, but I think an exception should be made for shills, in the same way that I think individuals should be afforded maximum liberty but corporations should be held to a different standard.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Companies should definitely be held to a different standard, and held accountable for having employees astroturf or do any paid activity that benefits their business while disrupting the natural discussion ecosystems.

[–]chadwickofwv 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (12 children)

I can agree that paid influencers should be banned, but how can you be sure someone is being paid for a post? I believe you have to default to free speech unless you can prove an account is a paid shill, not just a shill. I don't really believe this site has the resources for that type of investigation.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (10 children)

As users, we don't unless something is obvious enough or there's strong evidence.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

It's obvious to most of us.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

Ok. I prefer giving people the benefit of the doubt.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 5 fun -  (7 children)

That's fine. I did as well, for half a year. I rejected the people who told me socks was a waste of time, because I was much softer on weak people back then.

But that user is incredibly inauthentic. You simply have not had the same level of exposure some of us have had. Hard work shows forth proper fruit, and dirty work shows forth rotten fruit. Socks only has the few authentic leftists here defending him, people who are most likely to fall for that account's lies and rhetoric. So, good on you for being influenced by some third-party.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (5 children)

How long has socks been here?

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

Nov. 2020

This reminds me, if I may butt in: "inauthentic" is one of the various forms of strange name-calling I've only seen on Saidit, and I don't know what it means or why anyone has to use the term. It's just bullying, though I am surprised by the lengths to which some users will go to continually claim that users thay don't agree with are paid antifa, Soros, Chinese, Zionist, libtard, gay, non-white, furry, dominatrix, Opus Dei, Jesuit, Rothschild, Fauci, Big Pharma, CIA, NSA, terrorist shills. I've learned all of that here on Saidit. I previously had no idea one could be so talented. Lucky me.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (3 children)

I'm guessing that it's meant to mean that you're not saying things that you truly agree with, and that you're adhering to a narrative that isn't necessarily your own-- one considered harmful, etc..

The issue is unwillingness to understand that not everyone feels the same. When both parties in an argument fervently believe that they're correct, they consider their opponent to be either woefully misguided, stupid, a troll, or a shill. Hilariously, no one likely has it all figured out. We create an armour out of our personal philosophies, and get all in a tizzy when someone tries to take a shot though.

I guess you just have to buckle in and assume your fursona, socks.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Hard work shows forth proper fruit, and dirty work shows forth rotten fruit.

Poetic. Saved.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's irrelevant if they're paid or not.
It's irrelevant if they shill or not.
We all have agendas.
It matters if they break the rules - perpetually.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

This is what u/D3rr needs to get through his head, unless he himself is ok with paid influencers acting on this website, willy nilly. Willy nilly, I say.

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

unless he himself is ok with paid influencers acting on this website

Yes, I am fine with it for numerous reasons

  • this is anonymous social media, there is no way to stop it
  • there is no way to identify them aside from witch hunting, which can ruin a site even more than having paid shills. e.g. AOU and Poal
  • there are no rules that prohibit being a "paid influencer"
  • i already spent hours and hours developing custom user and sub blocking tools
  • not my site, im just the temporary janny

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

My two cents: I agree.

I also think the rules should be enforced and perpetual downward trolls should be banned.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I respect your position, although I disagree and think your position is dangerous.

Long live the reign of u/D3rr!!!