I know this site is for free speech and all but please cut the antisemitism and conspiracy theory bs from the front page. It's not a good look and is going to drive people away from trying the site.

submitted by Locke from self.SaidIt

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]wristaction 28 insightful - 6 fun28 insightful - 5 fun29 insightful - 6 fun -  (19 children)

Why do you assume people will be turned off by antisemitic speech who were not turned off by reddit's antiwhite speech?

[–]FediNetizen 13 insightful - 4 fun13 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 4 fun -  (18 children)

Even if I get annoyed at the occasional racist post on Reddit, it's tolerable because it makes up such a small percentage of the content. On Saidit it's a lot more prevalent, and a lot harder to brush aside.

[–][deleted] 24 insightful - 4 fun24 insightful - 3 fun25 insightful - 4 fun -  (17 children)

As a jew myself, even one who has lived many years in Israel i naturally feel invested in all the antisemitism. That being said, the issue to me is that clearly a lot of people feel this way... that's what matters. Thinking you're solving anything by stopping people from expressing how they feel seems childish to me. And that desire also seems to come from a place where people feel intimidated. Maybe they're right about a lot and so them being able to speek freely about it is a good and important thing. Maybe they're crazy and sad losers in which case no one should feel intimidated by what they have to say.

[–]yayblueberries 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

Right? It amazes me how much we supposedly live in a country where everybody loves screaming "free speech" and then they all want to silence the first opinion they see that they hate. All that does is silence somebody who is probably already quite angry about something, which is only going to make them more furious, and fuel their hatred. No wonder this country is so full of very extreme people at this point.

[–]FediNetizen 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

If that "amazes" you, then I suspect, you don't actually understand what free speech is.

There are four fundamental aspects to free speech:

1) The right to speak 2) The right not to speak 3) The right to listen 4) The right not to listen

An individual or community is free to reject whatever views they like. That's part of the 4th freedom. A church is free to either limit or outright reject the speech of atheists. A feminist club is free to limit or outright reject men's rights activists. And an online community is free to limit or outright reject whatever views it likes.

[–]Uncle-Ruckus 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

And an online community is free to limit or outright reject whatever views it likes.

Funny you say that when the site admins outright state they do not want to censor anyone. And it is their right.

[–]FediNetizen 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Is it censorship when a newspaper pushes a hot take to the opinion section? Neither I nor the OP are arguing that they should be banned. Just that they shouldn't be on the front page representing saidit.

[–]Extract 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

The front page is shaped by user votes.
If it's "representing" saidit, it's because the majority is upvoting them over other posts.

As this and the other post calling such posts out has more upvotes, it also shows there is a majority of lazy fucks who could change what's on the front page, but the only thing motivating them enough to vote isn't good or interesting content - it is a post that bitches and whines about others.

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

yep. creating interesting content is the answer. Fill saidit with what you love, because you can't downvote what you hate into oblivion. /u/magnora7 did a great thing with the voting system.

[–]Uncle-Ruckus 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You are advocating for views you don’t agree with to be intentionally excluded from and be treated differently on online forum. That in itself is censorship. Your analogy doesn’t even make complete sense. If there was a pro LGTBQ front page tab and anti gay posts were filtered from there that’d make sense. The only reasonable option is a personal content filter, or an option to be to have cuss words or derogatory words censored with asterisks, like f***. You are doing no favors to yourself by limiting what views others are allowed to promote.

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

Platform VS Editor. Look it up.

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

Just that they shouldn't be on the front page representing saidit.

Fuck you. This is saidit, not your personal domain. Deal with it or fuck off

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

And an online community is free to limit or outright reject whatever views it likes.

And we reject the free-speech curtailing hate that says we can't talk about the jewish issue.

IF you want to have a safe space, make a sub that bans it, and live there.

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

You're not distinguishing between a PLATFORM and an EDITOR. Saidit and similar sites are (or pretend to be, in reddit's case) PLATFORMS for the exchange of ideas. As such, the platform takes no responsibility for its users' view. This is also why Google, Facebook and other censorship sites may well lose their "platform" status and become known as "editors". Currently they are behaving like editors but enjoy the advantages of platforms. That may well not last.

Anyway, you are confusing the two. They are very different.

[–]Fitter_Happier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

an online community is free to limit or outright reject whatever views it likes.

And a store has a right to not serve Blacks.

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Lol no it doesn't have you been in a coma since the civil rights act was passed?

[–]Fitter_Happier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Moron, that was sarcasm to make my point about "muh private company".

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

Well it was a really stupid point, then. If you don't understand the difference between not being able to buy food at a grocery store because of something you can't control like race, and getting kicked off a website for behavior which you can control, then you don't understand the issue.

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

Race, creed, religion. These are all illegal to discriminate against.

Paypal will ban you for being against mass immigration. Does this seem legal to you?

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

everybody loves screaming "free speech" and then they all want to silence the first opinion they see that they hate

Thing is, I believe most Americans with deep roots here don't feel this way. We've had 1A since forever and it's ingrained in our souls that Free Speech is ESSENTIAL to a free society. All this "White Fragility" bullshit is just that, bullshit. If you can't say what you think you don't have any freedom and you can't make anything better.