Going to nuke my thousands of reddit comments with a saidit message. Need advice

submitted by Cindy from (self.SaidIt)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Cindy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I like it. Intriguing and not politically oriented.

I'll probably do exactly as you typed but I want to add something heartfelt to the end. Probably about banning the women's health sub, wish I could find more info on that. Also I might mention that reddit censored the saidit link itself, that could rustle some jimmies

[–]LarrySwinger2 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I've been testing around a bit. It looks like comments get hidden when you explicitly include a hyperlink to Saidit, but you can still include the text "https://saidit.net". That will then automatically become a hyperlink. Better take advantage of this.

[–]Cindy[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

This comment has been deleted in an effort to raise awareness for reddit's rampant censorship. Why?

Reddit has banned innocuous subreddits, and threatened to ban the sub dedicated to Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome, all while protecting actually-dangerous subs that post violent rape pornography. Reddit has consistently demonstrated a disdain for free speech and a disregard for its users' safety.

What can I do about this?

Join saidit at https://saidit.net. It's an alternative to reddit that promotes civil discourse and freedom from censorship.

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

freedom from censorship.

"less censorship" or "a wider overton window" might be more accurate.

anon: thought it was about creating an alternative to reddit's censorship.

m7: Well you thought wrong. This site used to be named antiextremes.com for a reason. It's not a free-for-all because we don't want to be voat either.

source

If you promote saidit as censorship-free, the people your edited comments bring will be disappointed.

[–]LarrySwinger2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Do you really have to post this every time you see "saidit" and "censorship-free" in the same post? Censorship implies that there's a political or related motivation behind the deletion of the content. Everything in the linked post shows that magnora took action to keep the site focused on constructive debate. Yes, there can still be deletion of content to maintain the quality of the site. You receive confirmation that the pyramid of debate is compatible with occasional deletion, so you start opposing the pyramid of debate, which is absurd. You don't seem to realize that people get employed by organizations to infiltrate sites like this one and shill and create division. That's the option they turn to as their alternative to censoring this website. That's what magnora's preventing. If you want to see what a community like this one would look like without quality control: magnora gave you one alternative, namely voat, and another one is /r/conspiracy where shills abound. Please just get over this.

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

Do you really have to post this every time you see "saidit" and "censorship-free" in the same post? [...] Please just get over this.

Don't you want to have diverse viewpoints present on SaidIt? Why would someone who values freedom from censorship try to engage in speech suppression?

I'm aware that content-flooding attacks and such exist.

When I first learned about SaidIt, it was advertised to me as a free speech platform, a platform where anyone could freely speak their minds, a platform free of everything that was wrong on reddit. Much like the message OP just suggested, that I replied to, that you're trying to suppress my future responses to. I was disappointed. The pyramid of debate does make it not a free speech platform. It may be an open discussion platform, but there are lots of powerful forms of speech that are not constructive discussion. Like the Charlie Hebdo cartoons. And other satire. The onion and babylon bee can actually make people think and reconsider political positions in important ways, even if they do it through ridicule. These are not constructive, I don't like them for a lot of reasons. But when you start saying you can't do those things in the name of offending someone? That doesn't seem right to me. Especially if you don't have clear and uniformly enforced rules. And it's my impression that SaidIt does not.

As part of trying to avoid "becoming voat," SaidIt is artificially controlling the window of acceptable discourse here. It's a politically motivated action. The idea that the discourse that takes place on /s/debatealtright, for example, is "extreme" is a political position.

I'm not saying that M7 can't do that if he wants to. But what I do think it that it's important to be honest and open that that's what's going on.

I also think that M7 does not take the pyramid of debate seriously in his own interactions, some of the quotes from the linked thread are an example. (And arguably you aren't here either, "can you please just get over it" and "do you really have to" are not fact-based high-pyramid modes of interaction. If you think I'm wrong, just politely, factually, correct my statement so I can be right too!)

I know being a content moderator in any way can be difficult, but I don't think it's right to "just let him off the hook" -- that doesn't help anyone. These issues are important, especially in an environment where a huge amount of censorship is going on. It's good to remain careful, vigilant, and very vocal about these things happening as long as we are able, whether they're mistakes or not.

I want SaidIt to be promoted accurately, and I don't think it's a trivial issue. I want people who are not aware of the problems and speech-suppressing aspects of SaidIt's stated and de-facto policies to be aware. There's nothing wrong with a place like SaidIt existing, but I do think it's wrong to promote it as something that's "free from censorship" or "free-speech" or "ideologically neutral" when it isn't.