you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Arundel 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

SaidIt is less democratic than Wikipedia.

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


Do you prefer the tyranny of the mob (of paid trolls, deep state actors, and brianwashed SJWs)?

Wikipedia forbids folks from organizing to get things done on Wikipedia. For example, if a bunch of truthers wanted to get together to improve the wildly inaccurate 911 Truth Movement article they'd all be bannished. ONLY the admins are allowed to form mobs. That's hardly democratic.

There are ample ways to be democratic on SaidIt. You can come up with ideas in /s/IdeasForSaidIt and then openly draft proposals in the wiki and then when you or your pose feel that's ready to go you can post it in /s/SaidItSurveys.

If people like it they'll comment or they'll ignore it. I don't know if it'd "democratic" for you but it sure seems fair to me.

There are only 5 rules:

  1. By the Terms And Content Policy, "If a person is caught repeatedly dragging discussion in a downward direction on the Pyramid of Debate, they will be removed."

  2. No vending of weapons, drugs, and stolen goods, nor discussion about, nor links leading to illegal things.

  3. No pornography. It's too much trouble to monitor and there's no shortage elsewhere.

  4. No astroturfing or artificial amplification of your free speech voice. For example, do not upvote yourself or others using alternate usernames or sock-puppet accounts.

  5. One sub per week per user.