all 8 comments

[–]fschmidt 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Quite absurd. The internet is a lost cause.

Children should not be on the internet. Children should learn from books.

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

Responsible authorities can indeed exist, even online. But it won't be an easy fight.

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

I disagree. Stop putting your faith in platforms and publishers to deliver your desired output. They don't deserve loyalty, and they will abuse it.

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

place that parents can trust,

Peer pressure alone is enough to warp the mind of a child into accepting illogical statements to better fit in. There's no source of communication, that is full of strangers, that won't create the system you're trying to avoid. imo children under the age of 14 shouldn't be able to use social media (facebook, twitter, myspace, ect.,) without parental supervision, but there's no way to block that without censoring most of the internet along with it, which is also bad when you consider how being denied access to easy information can stunt a child's ability to understand the world.

with other people who to trust?

That is the job of the parent. "Hey Mom/Dad/Other Adult, I just read this thing online. Is this true?"

The moment they're ignored when asking a question, or insulted for not knowing the answer, they will default to the mindless idiots around them they call friends that have no idea either. And that's the best case scenario. If they start searching for answers by talking to random strangers online the brainwashing only gets worse.

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

have to say...the down history of saidit is kinda awkward

edit: hey i hate to see it too. you prolly need something like a .onion site with saiditor owned servers to make a solid revolutionary base on the internet (depends on who you're up against, if the US then...god bewilling.) but all the onion forums are basically just drug markets atm

[–]LarrySwinger2 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

A Saidtor owned .onion site... like Incantation? :-)

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

Hi there. This is Incantation, a site that started as an idea to have a more discussion-centric forum for discussing conspiracies, but also grew out of a discontent with the way Saidit was being run, and aims to function as a lifeboat for the sinking ship that that site has become. Discussion-centric in that it uses a traditional forum layout with a bump system and the ability to subscribe to individual threads, as opposed to the short lived threads that the news-centric Reddit software focuses on. This ensures that threads gain visibility based on how much engagement there is. I want this forum to be easily accessible. That's why guest posting is enabled. This can lead to problems with trolls in the future. My vision is to gradually deal with this as it becomes a problem, for example by requiring guest posts to be approved first, and the same for newly registered users. While the site is small, we can enjoy the flexibility that we have now. wow, sounds interesting, thanks.

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

Actually, there are many sites which still have relatively civil intellectual discourse.

The problem is very few people go to those sites. Usually they're limited to a couple of dozen members.

We're up against human nature here. Humans seek out excitement and friction. I have no idea what the evolutionary advantage to emotional argument is, but humans (based on where they gravitate to for "news" and "entertainment") flock to emotional, low-level argument greatly in preference to calm, rational debate.

Mob behavior is deeply coded in us. I agree with you that it is important to maintain as many spaces as we can where calmer minds can gather, but I don't hold out much hope that these spaces will become the nucleus of society. It's not where crowds go. That's kind of by definition.