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 →

[–]soundsituation 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 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] 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 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 -  (1 child)

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

[–][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!!!