you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (17 children)

I'm not sure what all his master plan is, I just volunteered to help him use this code. I think he has some bug fix ideas and some changes/features ideas.

What's not free speech on SaidIt?

Probably the no advocating violence rule.

[–]proc0 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (16 children)

Probably the no advocating violence rule.

Hmm, well that is against the law in most places. You can rest assured it will be monitored by gov. agencies. I don't think there is a workaround there.

[–]fschmidt[S] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

It is against the rules here to praise God for wiping out Sodom and Gomorrah since that is considered glorifying violence. d3rr has been fairly relaxed, so SaidIt has been okay recently. But magnora7 implemented harsh censorship here (like this) when he was active, and this is his site. If he comes back to being an active admin, SaidIt will become unusable.

[–]proc0 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

I see, well would there be no modding at all? That is probably not going to work. If there will be mods, how would they be checked?

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

Unlike SaidIt, mods would have total control over their subs. Why do mods need to be checked?

[–]proc0 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

Why do mods need to be checked?

How would you prevent another mod from abusing powers? Is there going to be no global moderation? There's going to be horrible subs, and probaby taken over by porn or trolls.

[–]fschmidt[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

Porn won't be allowed. There will be some horrible subs but you can mute them. For me, most subs are horrible anyway. I discussed how to avoid offending normal users here. With this system, I don't care if there are troll subs or other horrible subs.

[–]proc0 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Ok, i was reviewing that other thread. Interesting so far, but IMO it's not enough to really come up with something much different than Saidit.

For example, you said:

I see no need for site-wide moderation (except for things like illegal content, porn, etc.).

Then you mention how mods would have total control over their subs... how do you reconcile these two features/ideas? In theory it's a contradiction. Either mods have FULL control and allow literally anything, or by definition they will have PARTIAL control. Where that line really is, I think is besides the point, because you will be in the same position as Saidit where someone else is telling you what is allowed in your sub. You can argue, well porn is obvious, however there is infinite amounts of gray area where the discussion could never end as to what should or should not be considered porn, depending on the sub.

In other words, if it's not the owner of the sub having FULL control, then eventually the discussion of where the boundaries are for PARTIAL control would land you more/less where Saidit (and even Reddit) is at the moment. This is the core of a lot of the problems. People disagree on what is allowed, but that's because it's almost impossible to define that line of partial control.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

it's almost impossible

Agreed.

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Obviously I can't allow FULL control because if I allow illegal speech, I will be shut down. The goal is simply to allow much more free speech than anywhere else. The line can never be perfectly exact, but I think this goal is worthy enough. My views, or Nazi views, or other extremely unpopular views aren't allowed to be expressed in any social media. My site would be the only one to allow such views.

[–]proc0 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

The line can never be perfectly exact

Right, but this is precisely the problem. And what happens is that the sites start off with great intentions but because the free speech line is so hard to pin down, inevitably the new people come in and ruin it by interpreting that line as something that tramples on free speech for most people.

Presumably growth and reaching millions of people is part of the goal, since other smaller boards do allow the free speech you're talking about (like the 4chans and such). I understand you have good intentions but you won't be able to monitor all the conversations and impose your goodwill for very long if you intend on growth to happen. That's why either the free speech line has to be formally defined (with strict definition that covers almost every possible corner case), and/or the site has some novel feature(s) for ensuring that the future mods will not trample on the free speech.

I think there are some solutions there, but it would require a vastly different structure to the forum platforms, and therefore probably new code from the ground up.

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

Well I'm just happy that he's interested in a spin off. The code is stagnating here. It's python 2 deprecation hell.