Saidit is worse than reddit with censorship.

submitted by Troll from (self.SaidIt)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]worm 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You seem to have taken this rather personally - is that a tone response I spy, and are you dodging the point to boot? I'm sure we all aspire to reach the top of the pyramid, don't we Maggie?

To answer your question, I am on this site, on Reddit, and on Voat to argue with myself. I've given up on convincing anyone of anything with words, but maybe if I keep shouting into the void long enough I'll be able to clarify my thoughts to myself. And there is no better void than the circlejerk you find on here and in Reddit.

You've tried to make this site different, I'll give you that. But I'm looking at the way things are going, and I'm seeing a Voat down the pipelines once the userbase gets big enough. Maybe you're not seeing it because you're emotionally invested in your brainchild, or maybe you're not seeing it because you generally agree with the things that get put on here like Troll has suggested. I don't really care why you don't see it - I'm just going to tell you what I see, and you're free to disagree if you want.

After all, we do like our pyramids, don't we?

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

But I'm looking at the way things are going, and I'm seeing a Voat down the pipelines once the userbase gets big enough. Maybe you're not seeing it

Of course I see it. It's one of the core missions of the site. Did you not read this very thread? I'm constantly engaging these people and giving them warnings such that they will eventually be banned. What else do you expect me to do to stop this pipeline?

The pipeline isn't here yet, but you're already writing me and the site off. It reeks of concern trolling rather than actual concern, to be frank. Do you actually want the site to be better, or do you just want to convince everyone it's awful? Because it appears a lot more like the latter than the former at the moment.

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

What else do you expect me to do?

I don't expect you to do anything, because I genuinely don't think you can do anything. Once you set up a voting system and allow people to vote for the content they want to see up top, they will vote for the content that chimes with their biases. Unless you're capable of changing human behaviour entirely, you're powerless to do anything. An acknowledgement that the voting system is inherently bad for discussion would be very amusing for me, but that's about it.

If you're asking for experimental ideas about how we can ensure posts are quality? I'd suggest that you implement pseudo-academic standards on posts and top comments. Require citations, require a standard length in characters or words, and allow free discussion within that framework. I'd be happy to discuss it further, but I know you wouldn't care; like everyone else on this site, all you care about is owning your opponent in as few words as possible. So why should I care, if you don't even care about your own site?

Regarding the matter of Voat, or what makes a Voat

You know, the way you're writing just made me realize - you and I fundamentally disagree on what makes a Voat. You seem to be much more concerned about substance of opinions than the methods in which opinions are expressed.

As far as I'm concerned, Voat's opinions aren't the problem. I'd be happy to sit down with a white supremacist, a communist, a Nazi, or even an anarchist as long as they're willing to entertain counterarguments politely and rationally. The problem with Voat - and a growing problem on this site as well - lies in the way they treat dissenting opinions. Arguments which are well-made but disagree with one's opinions are punished, while cheap jabs at the "wrong opinions" are rewarded by the hugbox.

As far as I'm concerned, that is exactly where Saidit is headed. True, the users on Saidit in a few months' time may hold different political opinions when compared to Voat. But does the opinion really matter when the methodology is the same?

Consider this very thread. Numerous insults are hurled at the person who made the thread, not necessarily because of the lowbrow methods with which he expresses his opinion, but simply because the opinion itself is seen as being wrong.

I could scroll through this thread and find any number of people simply making insults, jokes, and other comments that would fit right in on any old Reddit or Voat thread being labelled as informative simply for insulting someone they disagree with. Observe the comment by anorganicbear or EndlessSunflowers, for instance.

It reeks of concern trolling rather than actual concern

Good one. I think I've just stopped being concerned about this site by now. I'm just disappointed that I was stupid enough to entertain your delusions of what this site would be. Anyone who's been on Reddit or its clones should have seen this coming the moment a voting system was implemented.

[–]happysmash27 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The problem with Voat - and a growing problem on this site as well - lies in the way they treat dissenting opinions. Arguments which are well-made but disagree with one's opinions are punished, while cheap jabs at the "wrong opinions" are rewarded by the hugbox.

I think that is less of a problem on this site than others, and this is why I like it here…

Observe the comment by anorganicbear or EndlessSunflowers, for instance.

…but yes, those comments are definitely low-quality exceptions. Has anyone mentioned this to /u/anorganicbear and /u/EndlessSunflowers yet? We really should strive to do better than this.

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

I consider my argument to fall on the "contradiction" level of the pyramid of debate. Not the highest, but not the lowest.

I suppose you guys interpret it as "ad hominem", however, there's no evidence that I intended it to attack the characteristics or authority of the OP. Just based on his post, it seems like he fits in at voat, and not here.