you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]teelo 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

Think of SaidIt being a free speech site. You came here because you were censored on your original site. You complained about being censored. And now that you're here, you've gone straight to work censoring others. Do you see the irony?

[–]GenderCriticalOnly 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Sure, but I think there’s a difference between “here is a site where we can all freely post, and in this one tiny part of it various repetitive comments will be removed (and the sidebar says this)” and “nobody can talk about this anywhere without being, at best, removed”.

Imagine people hated LotR so much, that they organised on Discord to disrupt and shut down any site that discussed LotR positively. Imagine knowing that people are openly talking about having followed the little group of people who want to talk about the books, that they are discussing what they post on Saidit now, and that they want to continue disrupting any attempt at conversation. If the GC subs were not proactive about removing that disruption, they always got derailed by organised groups who are open about using multiple accounts each to disrupt the subs and prevent normal conversation from taking place.

I am all for transparency in modding, and transparency about the rules, and people having the right to discuss things. I think as long as there is transparency (and I agree, the lack of transparency was an issue), it’s reasonable to have some spaces that are only about discussing something from a particular perspective, and to disallow the sort of basic questions and arguments that we hear all day every day, as long as that doesn’t impact the availability of other spaces to have those conversations: if you don’t do things like that, all spaces become the same having the same conversations dominated by the same loud people, and if nothing else that is incredibly boring. Nobody was saying anywhere else on Saidit shouldn’t allow those conversations, and places are easily available to have them.

[–]teelo 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (5 children)

Your wall of text does not disprove the simple fact of irony: if you're going to engage in censorship, then don't come here complaining about censorship.

[–]GenderCriticalOnly 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If you’re not here to discuss, then that’s fine.

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

I am here to discuss. You're the one who has failed to refute my point.

If you want to continue to fail to refute my point, then thats fine. Just admit that you believe the rules apply to others but not yourself. Just admit that you believe that others should be censored while you should not.

[–]GenderCriticalOnly 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I explained that I saw a difference in two different behaviours, and explained why. You responded that it was a “wall of text”, reiterated your initial statement, and did not engage with anything I had said. That’s not discussion.

If you walk into the cat-appreciation room, rather than the dog-appreciation room, and start going on about how dogs are much better than cats, I don’t think it’s censorship for you to be told to talk about it next door in the dog-appreciation room. It would be censorship to shut the dog-appreciation room, or make sure nobody could hear what you said in the dog-appreciation room, or whatever.

Not being able to talk about every single topic in every single space in any way you want isn’t censorship in the same way that shutting down easy access to spaces where you can discuss every single topic in any way you want is. I am fine with the former, and oppose the latter.

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're still refusing to address the point I raised. Just admit that I'm right and you have failed to provide anything to counter my point.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, censorship in general is not the problem. GC (maybe similar to a Christian group) doesn't claim to be a general platform like reddit does. It's censoring things that do not violate GC's stated rules that I disagree with.

[–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

GC is full of gross hateful cunts. Nothing changes, no matter where they are. They cannot deal with debate at all, and banned everyone who didn't suck their clits in worshipful cuckdom when they were on reddit. Of course they'll do the same here. Being able to follow saidit rules is far far beyond their abilities.

[–]lemmiz 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

you complain about "gross cunts" not being able to follow rules, yet you're so incapable of following rules yourself that you end up on the second lowest section of the pyramid of debate

https://saidit.net/wiki/index#wiki_rules

https://infogalactic.com/w/images/thumb/e/ef/The_Pyramid_Of_Debate_v3_Detailed_TT_Norms_Medium_Text_Outline_Grey_BG.png/1024px-The_Pyramid_Of_Debate_v3_Detailed_TT_Norms_Medium_Text_Outline_Grey_BG.png

smh such projection

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

Mate, I generally combine elements from the very bottom as well as the top of the pyramid. Mix it up a little to keep things legit.

Sure, I occasionally just call people cunts, but at the same time I also post thoughtful and considered reflections. depends on the value I place upon the person I'm talking to and whether I consider them to be respectful enough to meet me on the level for rational and constructive debate, or whether they are just fuck wits who say 'no u' and then wave their internet dicks about

[–]lemmiz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ok.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There used to be a debate sub, /r/GCdebatesQT, but that one is private now.