The same people who say we need to "stop with the anti-semitism" are the same ones who will support anti-White rhetoric as free speech

submitted by EuropeanAwakening from (self.SaidIt)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Bitchcraft 21 insightful - 4 fun21 insightful - 3 fun22 insightful - 4 fun -  (6 children)

The problem with some forms of anti-Semitism in particular is that it's just so repetitive and infects everything. What's going on in the mind of somebody who posts "DA JUICE DID DIS" all day? People who post this type of thing post nothing else. I'm a GC-fugee, but I don't just post my political grievances all day, so even if you mute all the GC subs, I'm a net contribution to saidit. But for many of the "DAE hate kikes" people, that seems to be all they have in life.

[–]magnora7 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I just want to also point out that people are deliberately posting low-effort racist garbage with the intent of destroying the information quality of saidit, as well. It's not just true believers who are dumb, it's also smart people using dumb propaganda to destroy the signal-to-noise ratio of this website. And the truly smart ones know how to do it without breaking site rules so my hands are tied in being able to remove them.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm quite certain a lot of them are from /pol/ and voat with the explicit intention of ensuring apolitical or centrist voices never have any peace. The worst thing any extremist of any kind has to contend with is the open acknowledgement the majority think they're lunatics - which is why they do everything possible to make sure we can't be in peace.

[–]magnora7 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I agree. I am starting to wonder if /pol/ is actually a front for something else

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

What we definitely need is the ability to block other users individually, just from their comments. That would help people manage it a lot better. But on the alternative, there are a lot of things these users will try to do. One of them is to become powermods, snatch up places and pages and accumulate them just to hold so nobody else can have them. Their "free speech" means they want their extremism to take over. I already watched this happen on Voat back in the day, when it was Whoaverse.

It's one thing to let them have their own places. It's quite another to let them take over everything with irrelevant spam about "the jews".

[–]magnora7 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes that site-wide user block feature is high on our to-do list, we'd like to have it too. Our source code is here if anyone wants to help: https://github.com/libertysoft3/saidit

One of them is to become powermods, snatch up places and pages and accumulate them just to hold so nobody else can have them.

Our modrules limit a user to 40 subs max: https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/w6s/saidit_rules_for_moderators/

I already watched this happen on Voat back in the day, when it was Whoaverse.

Me too, friend.

It's a work in progress, we're doing our best here to balance free speech with preventing spam as you say.

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

Sadly I am useless. I can only make suggestions. My suggestion would be, it should be far lower than 40 subs max. I'd argue one sub max, both for moderating and for owning, and you should not be mod of one sub and owner of another. This restriction would make it a lot more difficult for abuses to happen sitewide later.

But either way you're going to have an inevitable problem of special interest groups, say servers of people, snapping things up for control. How you want to deal with that is anybody's guess, it happened to Wikipedia as you know. There may need to be, at some point, the ability for users after a certain point to be able to vote out or inhibit these kinds of takeovers. Some kind of process to appeal to if users cry foul.

Beyond that? I wish I could do something useful. Sadly I cannot.