Saidit Content Admin Rules Clarification Page

submitted by magnora7[A] from self.SaidIt

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Cornfed 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Hopefully you could clarify what is meant by "advocating violence" as stupid mods like AXXA seem to have a stupid definition. The obvious definition would be based on US law, i.e. Brandenburg vs Ohio.

[–]magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Advocating physical violence to someone's person, or to a group of people. (for example: "I hope he gets stabbed." or "Let's burn all those people.")

Mean words don't count as advocating violence, but they will often count as ad hominem.

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

This would seem to preclude perfectly normal political speech such as advocating corporal punishment or saying things like "We should go to war with Iran".

[–]magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah there is gray area in this regard, but typically I wouldn't remove things that one could consider lawful

[–]Cornfed 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

The normal criteria would be imminent threat, which is to say advocating participants to the conversation commit a specific crime within their own agency in the present time.

[–]magnora7[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes we do it a bit more broadly than the absolute legal minimum. I think legally it requires stating a place and a time and a method and personal intent, and if all those are present then it's illegal. We cast our net a bit more broadly than that (but not too much more) to ensure there's no legal trouble for saidit.

[–]AXXA 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

To give a concrete example he said that people that take COVID seriously ought to be killed by being shot behind the ear. I removed those comments and warned him. I think his point is that from a legal perspective this is advocating a general policy and not a specific call to violence. My view is from the perspective of the PoD this comment falls below the level of civil discourse that Saidit tries to engender.

https://saidit.net/s/whatever/comments/8r6i/theyre_murdering_people_using_covid_protocols/wgpr

[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah I think that's pretty obviously breaking the rules, imo