Are calls to violence allowed on saidit?

submitted by Blackbrownfreestuff from self.debatealtright

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

I haven't had my tea yet, so lemme just bulletpoint my thoughts here:

Saidit is going to have zero users anyway at this rate.

Reddit and Imgur seem under no threat of being shut down despite widespread calls for violence concerning Roe v Wade.

Socks generates a lot of discussion.

Socks has a bunch of other accounts.

I don't see how this helps anything.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

Reddit and Imgur seem under no threat of being shut down despite widespread calls for violence concerning Roe v Wade.

That's because those sites are protected by Jew oligarchs. We are not. I can understand why magnora7 would take calls to violence so strictly. Personally I like the rule because I find most people making calls to violence are often trolls or feds attempting to bait dissidents into being inflammatory. They can then use this manipulated inflammatory posting out of context to convict you in jew courts or convince normies that the dissident right is full of 'incel alt right terrorists!'

Socks generates a lot of discussion.

True, which is why I tried not to ban him even though he walked the line. However, if Magnora is going to treat DAR so strictly (i.e. pulling us off the main feed for 'violence' posting) then he should apply the standard fairly.

Socks has a bunch of other accounts.

I don't see how this helps anything.

Even though you can make sock puppet accounts it's still a pain when your main account goes away. It's a deterrent.

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Blackbrownfreestuff[S] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    I agree, DAR users who post calls to violence should be banned.

    Socks violated this rule more than two times.

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    We remove comments and ban users that call for violence but they are rarely from regular DAR users.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [removed]

      [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

      A common theme here is that all blacks should be removed from the US.

      You're leaving out Jews. We especially call for Jews to be peacefully removed or at least arrested and put on trial for their coordinated crimes against humanity and especially whites. However, this is not a call to violence even in the slightest. In fact it would be healthier and safer for both parties if blacks went back to their homelands. Blacks are so unsuited to live in civilized society that even a slight pull back in free handouts to them would cause massive violence and famine in their communities at the hands of their own people. That's not advocating violence either. Since dissidents understand the IQ and disposition of the average African we know how cruel it would be to randomly stop aid. That's why we advocate a slow peaceful disassociation and repatriation. If you spent any time here you'd see those discussions. Your only experience with dissidents is probably from left wing sources. Here's an article if you want to understand a more genuine position that's not a strawman.

      https://counter-currents.com/2014/06/the-slow-cleanse/

      Furthermore, black people commit more violence than whites and more rape. Even if dissidents called for a 'violent' expulsion of blacks (which they don't) it would be defensive just looking at the raw numbers of black on white crime. White people have a right to live in safety and not fear attacks, theft, rape and other crimes. White people have a right to live without Jews constantly advocating racial tension and racial 'retribution'. White people have a right to live free of extortion, extraction, grooming, conditioning and manipulation from Jews.

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

      Bahaha... another socks alt banned. Thanks for using your username to tell us what you are. Now, to rephrase one of your own silly comments:

      Scum like you are ruining Saidit. [Nobody cares that the degenerate] socks [wasted hundreds of hours of his life] for almost 2 years, and [acquired] 17000 [useless] karma, whereas you're just [a] weekend Saidit [pinko faggot] pussy, and you want Saidit to have only [pinko faggot pussy scum] like [socks and the whole of Reddit].

      You seriously think that after two months of inactivity you'd just mysteriously start commenting again on a subsaidit that isn't on s/all and on which you haven't commented on before!? And yet you know everything that goes on in this subsaidit? Bahaha... a soy-fuelled 50-year old 'man' crying about Trump and Tucker Carlson online thinks he can trick me by pretending to be anyone but socks? Bahaha... Speaking in the third-person about socks, are we? I'm sure you have plenty of practice doing that, being a mental head case.

      Given that Nazis irk you so much, I extend to you the obligatory Heil Hitler, you mentally-ill untermensch whose descendants will, in the unlikely event that you have any, be brown, pan and trans!

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

      Haha, i should have known that was a socks alt. Looks like m7 banned her quickly again.

      [–]Blackbrownfreestuff[S] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

      Reddit and Imgur seem under no threat of being shut down

      Reddit bans people all the time for calls to violence, if they didn't, reddit would cease to exist. Some calls to violence are allowed on reddit because our society generally accepts certain violent activism, such as black lives matter or militant feminism.

      I don't see how this helps anything

      Saidit has rules. Socks broke them repeatedly, was warned for breaking rules, then broke them repeatedly again. How do you suggest we have rules if they are not enforced?

      [–][deleted] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

      Saidit has rules. Socks broke them repeatedly, was warned for breaking rules, then broke them repeatedly again. How do you suggest we have rules if they are not enforced?

      I don't think anyone is overly concerned with the rules so much as getting rid of socks. We're doing the same thing Reddit does, banning people who we disagree with.

      But perhaps I'm wrong, I didn't see the comments in question. Is it something a reasonable person would honestly construe as a serious call to violence?

      [–]Blackbrownfreestuff[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

      Yes, she did this over and over again https://ibb.co/1r2dy1R

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

      That seems to me to be simply a case of "talking shit" about someone.

      I don't think we should be banning anyone with the current user numbers so low unless it is over a legal issue -- a real legal issue, or spam. There's a point where there simply aren't enough people to sustain conversation. I don't see that we have the luxury of purging ideological opponents like a big forum can get away with.

      [–]magnora7 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

      It's not about ideological opponents at all, it's about the fact that this potentially creates an existential crisis for saidit. If saidit gets shut down because we let one idiot run their mouth in a way that's literally illegal, then we all suffer. This is indeed a real legal issue as you mentioned, which is why I'm so strict about it. There is zero sense in putting all of saidit in jeopardy so one person can foam at the mouth with violent rage. Which is also breaking our rules we've had since day 1, which exist for that exact reason.

      Also, stats show that saidit is slowly growing, so this concern about it dying out is ill-founded, thankfully. https://www.similarweb.com/website/saidit.net/#overview

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)

      [removed]

        [–]magnora7 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

        Saidit won't grow catering to people advocating murder either... especially if that gets us shut down. I don't have all day to be giving people advocating murder 4th chances to participate in the community when they're clearly not acting in good faith. Let's get real. We have the rules for a reason, and they're useless unless enforced.

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

        Good point, I agree.