The idea that Saidit needs to be "saved" is not something I subscribe to so I can't answer that question. Saidit seems fine to me. The front page is relatively clean, diverse sub-saidits represented, not a lot of stuff I'd consider straight up spam, w.e, etc. It's certainly a lot better than it was a couple months ago when it seemed like other people where in charge (Ironleft gang or w.e). I mean weren't they trying to ban you or someone else for the same things? Granted they maybe didn't change the rules (Idk I didn't pay that much attention) but they seemed to reinterpret the rules so they could ban people because they were "breaking the rules". So it's funny that you try to discredit the idea of someone taking over saidit, because that's pretty much exactly what happened in that situation. Maybe it wasn't that overt but one group did get a lot of sway here on saidit, isn't that right? I mean come on that happened don't try and act like it's crazy to suggest it happening again and even on a bigger scale. It's not about being flexible for anyone, it's about enforcing censorship for any reason at all. I don't support censorship, or rules that try and enforce censorship, w.e you want to say. You can say I'm confusing censorship with any Orwellian term you like, but again that's just semantics. Banning = censorship, period.

You think socks is A.I.? Or some paid shill from some three letter company? Maybe, but it also might be that it's a person who leads a sad and boring life while getting dopamine hits from arguing with people on a semi (maybe?) popular website and if y'all didn't engage him/her, they would have nothing to do. The fact that you don't have the self control to just not engage with an individual is childish. Trying to use an excuse like the block feature doesn't work, or is "incomplete", is silly. You have the ability to ignore someone if you want, it just takes a little self control.