all 89 comments

[–]magnora7[A] 54 insightful - 5 fun54 insightful - 4 fun55 insightful - 5 fun -  (29 children)

Yup, I was there when voat was called whoaverse, I watched it all happen and you're absolutely right!

This is why user participation is important. This is why the pyramid of debate is important. This is why everyone who truly cares about saidit needs to voice their opinions and vote when they see something insightful or fun.

We have lots of defenses against what happened to voat, but primary among them is community.

The second thing we have going for us is no downvote. So the dedicated minority group cannot re-shape the site at large to their own desires nearly as easily. It got much worse as well after voat added restrictions where if you've been downvoted you cannot downvote others. It sped up the echo-chamber feedback-loop effect and let these extremists take over the mainstream culture of voat much more quickly. Now a dissenting voice of reason stands out like a sore thumb, and is downvoted to hell.

Saidit doesn't have these locking-out features because we don't have downvotes, and we're careful to avoid "improvements" to the algorithm that actually just speed up the feedback loop that creates an echo-chamber culture. Furthermore one group cannot brigade another, because there is no downvote, and also they must abide by the pyramid of debate or be banned from saidit. So the only remaining way to "brigade" is to argue one's point rationally.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the admins actually care. This site used to be called antiextremes.com, specifically referencing avoiding the extremes of reddit (censorship) and voat (far-right). It's literally our declared mission to avoid becoming voat, even right in our original name.

The reason reddit went bad is because the admins turned a blind eye (or perhaps were paid to) while brigading and astroturfing groups took it over, subreddit by subreddit.

Voat however failed because the admins just let whoever take it over, as you pointed out. They had no ideological backbone, no pyramid of debate, no nothing. Just an empty space for anyone who has enough free time to go absolutely nuts and create their own echo chamber. And that's exactly what happened.

But at saidit, we will actually will learn from their failures and try our best to avoid them.

Fourthly, saidit has open modlogs available in any sub under the list of mods, it says "moderation log". Anyone can click it and see everything every mod has ever done. Voat and reddit hide this information for mods only. This transparency adds a LOT of accountability. No more secret user deletions and secret mod coups.

Fifthly, we're run by donations. Not advertiser revenue or big secret investors. This means we have zero incentive to get rid of certain messages to please our advertisers and investors, because we have none other than community donations. We do not plan to ever change this funding model because saidit is run for the community, not for profit.

So you can see our approach is multifaceted, and we think we have a very good chance at avoiding the fate that befell voat. It won't be easy, but I believe we can do it.

[–]deleted 22 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 0 fun23 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So the only remaining way to "brigade" is to argue one's point rationally.

This alone will make this community multiple times better than Reddit and alternatives.

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

Agreed wholeheartedly.

[–]Troll 9 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

It was beyond clear that voat was in over their heads from the get-go.

I'm pretty far-right but it's completely understandable why one wouldn't want to become voat. I really want to see what the average voater's home life is like.

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

Think of SaidIt like a classy restaurant or nice place. Every once in a while we may dip into crass humour but we don't dwell in the gutter.

I've never been a Redditor but I learned about this one time I went too far. A now regretful lesson to learn from : /s/quotes/comments/8kd/einstein_quote_if_its_smaller_than_my_fist_or_an/

[–]zyxzevn 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I have some idea for in depth discussions, related to your "pyramid of debate". I think it may be a good idea.

Have a look at MIT Deliberation.
It is made to prevent forum manipulation and focus on discussions. You may improve it a lot with the pyramid idea.
Here is a link
It explains how different ideas can live together without being in conflict with each other. It is like a meta-organisation above the discussion.

It also shows a different problem: The main topic already assumes a certain position in the discussion. It assumes that there is a "catastrophic global heating". (Because it is MIT). This problem might be avoided by allowing your own meta-topics and place these same discussions in a different context.

I have also seen that these meta-topics are actually used to reduce discussions or mark them as "fully discussed", while in fact they are not. So I have added my own meta-structure, by starting every discussion with a meta-topic.

A meta-topic starts by stating its sources and initial idea. More sources can be added. So a discussion about an event can have like 15 different news-sources. That way people do not need to start a new meta-topic when there is some new minor news.

I would also add logical fallacies and logical biases as standard flag and reply option in the discussion.

In the MIT example, the discussion starts with a huge bias in the climate discussion. As I see it, there is in reality no large consensus. Many NASA scientists disagree with the findings, based on satellite observations.

To solve this problem, a meta-topic should always come with certain assertions/assumptions. Which can be discussed separately.

Also there should be trust-values of reporting on certain topics by certain agencies. I don't trust anything that is not directly observed. And I don't trust the CIA or military complex at all. I often assume that the opposite is happening. This means I may use them as an anti-source.

So in the meta-topics we can discuss observations, reports and mark how much we trust them. Even come with counter reports or observations. Only that makes a topic worthwhile, without even having a discussion.

On deeper levels the assumption is already be made that these reports are correct, so any discussion or complaints of these assumptions can be removed. That way the discussion can stay on focus.

Sadly the MIT version does not deal with trust-values, but I don't think they are easy to add. These values are different per user. Like my CNN trust value 5%,

On admin level you could create mainstream news channels as default. Each user will have personal trust values for these channels. But these can also differ per report, as sometimes bad sources give good reports.

The trust-values can also be used as a tar-pit for users. As it allows them to de-rank a lot of the meta-topics that they are not interested in supporting. And things that they trust will be more on top.

It can also be used as honey-pot by the admin to detect manipulations by companies or agencies. People that value CNN above 80% can be marked as non-trustworthy, but if these values are public the community can find these people very quickly.

Still manipulation is very strong at certain levels if you look at how the CIA or I$raeli online manipulation is organized. Often they pretend to be on one side, and derange the discussions by inserting emotionally loaded topics or replies.
For example, a scientific discussion on micro-thermite is often deranged with no-planers or nuclear or energy-weapons..

But the meta-topic also describes the limits of the discussion. So these distractions can be removed directly out of the discussion. They are meta off-topic. And they move to the meta-topic garbage can, allowing people to reuse their texts to create their own meta-topic or even to discuss the moderation. All separately.

If this works at all, still needs to be tested ;-)

[–]magnora7 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

That's interesting and might be very useful. But at the same time seems very rigid and unforgiving. I think the end result might just be similar to votes on reddit, where the groupthink essentially determines the consensus, because those are the people marking the logical fallacies and so on.

I like your framing of the concept of meta-topics, but I have to wonder if every thread isn't already a meta-topic, if you know what I mean.

Setting the limits of a conversation sounds interesting, but reminds me much of the Overton window, where intense debate is allowed within the window, but things outside the window are effectively taboo and aren't "allowed" to be discussed, and in this way the narrative is kept confined to the status quo.

Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing.

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

The Overton boxing ring.

The Overton humanitarian efforts.

The Overton safe spaces.

No fighting in here gentlemen, this is the war room!

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

The Overton Pillow Fight Slumber Party.

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

The Overton Michael Jackson tickle fight.

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

Replying because I think you may be interested in these ideas.

The deliberation and meta-topics still needs to be tested of course. I have not heard about the Overton window, and will look it up.

On reddit discussions works well, because similar people get to the same sub-reddit. But these sub-reddits are also echo-chambers of popular opinion. People do not want to change their opinion based on facts. They seem to do it based on emotions. This causes echo-chambers and moderation.

For example. In /r/physics I often get downvoted, because I present the well tested science instead of the popular science. If I write anything bad about the big bang, I will likely get banned. I notice there is a lot of moderation in scientific forums. Discussing 9/11 free fall was even forbidden.

meta-topics proposal

Let's keep the discussion structure as it is and add meta-topics.

The meta-topics are indeed an organisation above the post level that we see. It could even be a different meta-forum on top of this one. The meta-topic could deal with everything about the Muller report. Like a key-word, but more organized. It can be very slow-paced and go on for 2 years.

It could help to organize the 200 posts that will show up as soon the Muller report gets out. This will also bury any other news. If it is all under one meta-topic, people can see different sources at once.

The meta-topic as I see it, has many different sources and discussions and viewpoints underneath.
The viewpoints are just the parts of the discussion that are limited to the viewpoint. There could also be a funny side.

In code: meta-topic= {sources, discussions, viewpoints, funny}  

The limiting of the discussions, is not about stopping them. Branches of the discussions can be linked to certain viewpoints in the meta-topic. And people can continue discussions in these viewpoints alone. And add links in these viewpoints to other viewpoints.

It could work as a meta-organisation of the discussions. It may be very valuable after a few years. Like a wikipedia of discussions. Without censorship and with many sources and many viewpoints.

If you are discussing the involvement of the I$raelis in the demolitions at 9/11, you do not want to have the internet task force on you. Instead you want to discuss it and see where it leads. Neither do you want to discuss the powerful political lobby that is going on. Just stay on topic.
But if you think it belongs there, you can a link to a new viewpoint.
Like: what if 9/11 is also part of a mason ritual, or what if they also used nukes. The best viewpoints or links can be upvoted.

My idea behind is that people with certain ideas, can learn a different viewpoint by shifting this viewpoint/window. They can even positively contribute in a discussion that they do not even agree with, by having friendly conversations, or by pointing out certain logical fallacies or biases. Or by sharing some jokes.

A viewpoint is like a discussion that starts with: "What if ..? "
I see this type of discussions often in http://www.reddit.com/r/C_S_T/ and there we have open discussions about occult or weird stuff.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It could help to organize the 200 posts that will show up as soon the Muller report gets out.

I do like this type of thing.

When I first had the idea of saidit like 3 years ago, I imagined we could be able to have a story come out, then have 1 post about that story that includes a whole bunch of different sources and angles for the same story, as well as a timeline for the story as it develops. Then it'd be easy to follow a few major stories in a very comprehensive media-analysis kind of way. I think that'd be very valuable, but the technological hurdles are real. Not impossible, just extremely time-consuming. Maybe someday.

The ultimate would be if we can figure out a good way to integrate the wiki system with the rest of the site. Right now every sub has its own wiki. Check this one out for instance, anyone can edit this wiki page: https://saidit.net/s/OpenWikiTest/wiki/index

It's up to the sub's mods how open the wiki editing is, but for this one I've opened it wide up so we can practice as an example.

One bit of progress I made was moving the wiki tools box up to the top of the wiki page, instead of it being buried on the very bottom of the right sidebar like it was before.

But this whole wiki system was extremely under-utilized on reddit, I always felt, and part of that is because of how buried it is.

If we can come up with some sort of plan of a way to easily tie this wiki system in to the main posting/commenting system in a graceful way, that could be a great way to work toward the goals of creating these more long-lasting comprehensive systems to compile news information.

But we need to figure out exactly what that will look like, and then figure out how to code that in.

Right now the only way a person would know the wikis exist at all, is if they were to go to a specific sub, and then notice and click the 'wiki' tab at the top of the sub.

So the idea would be to figure out some way to tie in the wiki with the comment sections of a particular story, I guess. And maybe a way for when a news story article link is posted, for it to be linked somehow to a relevant wiki that is being built up about it. I guess maybe that could be done by comments?

I feel like there's something significant and useful that could be done with all this, but I'm not sure exactly what it would be yet. I'm open to ideas if anyone has any. But I think doing something with integrating the existing wiki structure in to the rest of the site more elegantly could do a lot. Someone just has to figure out a good design/approach for how to do that, that would take the least amount of coding (because that makes it much more likely to get done quickly)

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

I have done quite some programming, but indeed you would need to add a few new tables and references. Which can have complex complications. Linking is often difficult.

So I decided to make it simpler and very similar to the way discussions work.

I don't think a wiki system will work, as it shows only the data collected by one user or a few users. Or destroyed by one user (currently your example talks about boobs).

The simplest solution for a meta-topic

Each meta-topic can be similar to a normal post with replies underneath. Just with a different flag/enum.

The replies in the meta-topic are one of the 4 cathegories: sources, discussions, viewpoints, humour. These are also flags/enum. In time there could be some more. They are not necessary in order, but can be filtered or sorted.

These replies can be text, but also be a link to a source, or link to a discussion, or a viewpoint-discussion, or a humour reply. So there are 3 (or 4) types of links here. They could be encoded as URL. Viewpoints may need some texts to specify the "what if..", "Let's assume this or that is true".

The replies can start new branches of discussion-replies or discussion-links. Many people might want to add their own "fact checking" of the sources. And these can be discussed again.
Humour posts will be full with memes and other funny shit.
And even some viewpoints might be created in a funny way. Like: What if Trump is controlled by Putin?

I think the combination of depth of discussion and humour will attract nice people to the forum.

I think this could all be simple, if you program it all in a very similar way. But I leave that up to your expertise.

Well, let's give it some rest and maybe one of us will come up with a good solution. ;-)

I have some more on my wish list: I want to write full articles. This would be a post or reply in the discussion category. It would need chapters, revisions, and images right in the text.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Or destroyed by one user (currently your example talks about boobs).

But it's got the full history so it's very easy to walk back if modified (as I did), and there are variable restrictions to make it so that only more trusted users can modify it.

The replies in the meta-topic are one of the 4 cathegories: sources, discussions, viewpoints, humour. These are also flags/enum. In time there could be some more. They are not necessary in order, but can be filtered or sorted.

This is a really great idea! What if we strip it down even more, and instead of 4 types we have just 2 types: comments (like regular) and sources. Sources consist of only a URL and a headline title limited to 300 characters or so, that must be a copy of the article headline.

Then for a user to submit a source, it'd have a separate box next to the "add comment" box that is already there so users could submit alternate sources. And a source would appear differently from a comment in coloring so it would be obviously different, and would be able to be sorted out differently by the sorts. And people could comment and vote on them like normal.

This is not a bad idea...

[–]Node 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This site used to be called antiextremes.com

So this is what happened! Went to log in one day and the site was just gone. Looks like Dec 29, 2017 was about the last time I logged in.

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

Ha funny. We had it pointing at saidit for a while but eventually we let that URL expire for cost reasons

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

I don't know what happened (maybe one of my "lost all open tabs" events?), but at some later point I didn't get the redirect. Glad to see you're still alive and growing!

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ah sorry we lost you, but glad you found us again! :)

[–]Troll 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Child pornography and personal information is something you have to keep out of mod logs, for obvious reasons.

[–]magnora7 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

It just shows the action the mod took, not the content itself.

Example: www.saidit.net/s/saidit/modlog

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

Oh, gotcha.

[–]muhammad 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Just a heads up - I couldn't open the link with the android app.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks. I wonder why that would be. Can you open the link in a regular browser?

[–]muhammad 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, regular browser works fine.

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

Hm okay thanks for the report. If something like that happens again, let me know.

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

What's a pyramid of debate?

PS: Found an explanation here: https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/j1/the_saiditnet_terms_and_content_policy/

[–]Amplitude 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

The reason reddit went bad is because the admins turned a blind eye (or perhaps were paid to) while brigading and astroturfing groups took it over, subreddit by subreddit.

Reddit Admins were absolutely paid to control the narrative, or allow other agents access to the narrative.
/Politics and even /worldpolitics changed in 2015-2016.

I've been on reddit for over a decade, the way the "tone" of major subreddits changed to coincide with US Election Lobbying by the DNC is clear.
They banned / silenced people until major subreddits turned into uniform echo chambers, and then they maintained a narrative of RESIST! ORANGE MAN BAD! for the next two years.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I agree, I noticed the same patterns you mention. Reddit is so far gone, it's really terrible once you see the full scope of it.

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

What I'm wondering -- what's left to buy? The DNC is gearing up for a fight, but people who might be interested are already on the hate train.
What I'm saying is, the Progressives have saturated their available market. People into "woke" culture are already rabid supporters, and those who haven't succumbed are either critics, conservatives, communists, or just don't pay attention.

So what will they do next?

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think just to keep driving that wedge in deeper. Divide and conquer keeps people fighting each other instead of fighting the establishment ruling over them.

It's why subreddits like /r/enligtenedcentrism exist, where they basically make fun of anyone who is not a liberal extremist. And they've poisoned the phrase "both sides" by associating it with reactionary idiocy.

The goal now is to get rid of all the moderates, so only extremists exist anymore. Then it's much easier to run the re-election numbers because you're much more certain of how everyone is going to vote.

Basically, they want control. And the good way to get it is by controlling the minds of others, and the best way to do that is to destroy any moderates and any moderate conversations. Thus from the naive standpoint, the options seem to become "literally nazis, or the sane people". And of course then the latter is the obvious choice. They want everyone thinking like this.

And everyone who refuses to think like this, will now become "the bad guys who are shunned by society". And things just keep polarizing.

[–]Farseli 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

I had a lot of fun in the FPH days. Sure, I had a few uses call me a shill for being pro-gmo, but it's not like I got downvoted into oblivion.

"Have your say" until you say something that doesn't fit the anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist narrative they have going on there. Then the users take away your say.

I think that's one of the ways saidit might be better off. No downvotes means you can't be sent into negative karma and have your posting rights restricted beyond new user rates. And your posts won't be auto hidden.

Another is that this site isn't as afraid of demanding a certain level of etiquette from the users. Even Reddit doesn't care as much about poor behavior by users.

I commented on a refutation of the myth that Monsanto was suing farmers that accidentally planted patented seed and the reply I got was

I think you, and anyone defending Monsanto is a corporate bitch. I think that they either pay you. They employ you. They own you or they have something on you. I’m not a tin foil hat sorta guy. But tell me one logical normal reason you or anyone are in here defending them so thoroughly.

What exactly is your modulation? You’re just out there to defend the defenseless trillion dollar corporation? Poor poor suckers.

By holding our user base to the pyramid of debate model this kind of comment wouldn't be allowed. Nor would the comments I get on Voat.

I think the most interesting thing is the people I see posting in subs I want nothing to do with I also see posting things I do like in other subs and I can even talk with them in the chat.

At least for now, it isn't toxic to disagree and that's a huge difference.

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

+1 on that. I've seen the anti-GMO crowd settling in here though with subs like /s/bayer-monsanto. Yet another extreme.

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

Exactly. It doesn't seem to matter what the accepted science says. Is it a case of feels before reals? I don't know.

I'd have to ignore all of the reputable evidence (peer-reviewed papers and the like) to think that glyphosate is toxic (at least more so than table salt) and if I do that I might as well just throw away my degree.

So I'm just waiting. I'll make a s/progmo at some point and probably a s/provax

Edit: Also glad that calling someone a shill goes against the content policy. Sorry that someone doesn't want to join in on the circlejerk, doesn't mean you get to dismiss their evidence by calling them a shill.

[–]magnora7 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Please take 45 seconds and watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovKw6YjqSfM

Please consider that much of Monsanto's science isn't actually peer-reviewed in any thorough way, it only has the appearance of such. Monsanto has teams of scientists that work to make monsanto look good, and the ones that produce papers that don't make monsanto look good are let go. Then the positive articles are published journals that monsanto has connections to. Papers by independent teams with contradictory results are kept from being published and so must publish to lesser-known journals.

Unfortunately it is relatively easy for a company the size of monsato to create the false appearance of consensus in the scientific community about glyphosate, especially when billions of dollars of profit depends on it, so they will literally spend billions to keep that false consensus going because it is profitable to do so.

"It's hard to get a man to see the truth when his income depends on him not seeing it." - Upton Sinclair

And I say this as someone who worked doing medical research at a big institution for 7 years, and I have a paper that might be getting published soon. I have seen how things work from the inside, how the sausage is made, and it is not always pretty. And sometimes people don't really care about real science anymore, and it becomes a grind to them. A way to be employed and make money, that's all.

I love the scientific method, it is one of the pinnacles of human wisdom. However the published journals and proclamations don't always match up to this, and will sometimes box out opposing opinions, especially if their careers depend on it.

This is the difference between actual science using the scientific method, and what I call "scientism" which is just believing whatever gets published by the biggest journals, by the academic establishment.

Ideally, there'd be no discrepancy between the two. But in reality, because humans are faulty beings full of biases (especially when a money incentive is involved) there ends up being a lot of bias that creeps in to the process of deciding what gets published and what doesn't.

When you create an experiment that gives a repeatable result that goes against mainstream published scientific dogma, and everyone tells you you're wrong because they believe what is published over what is actually reproducible, there is a problem with the establishment.

And this is the situation we find ourselves in with many corporate-published studies that we took to be true.

Remember when scientists and doctors thought cigarettes were healthy in the 1940s-50s? That's because of corporate "science" published by cigarette companies. A few decades later, the real science eventually broke through and things turned against the tobacco companies. But it took literally decades to undo the damage they had done with their fake profit-driven science.

This type of infection in to the world of published scientific literature is a staggering problem that is woefully under-addressed in academia and the scientific community at large. But I think people are starting to wake up about it, because it's become so shockingly common.

And remember even without the profit incentives, established science can be very wrong about things. Luminous Aether used to be the prevailing description about how the vacuum of space transmitted light, but it's very easily provable to be incorrect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

The guy who realized washing hands before surgery was committed to a nuthouse because no one believed him. Decades later everyone knows he was unquestionably correct.

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

Great post- that video is classic and should be seen by everyone on the planet. There are lots of great books too - here's one

ALTERED GENES, TWISTED TRUTH: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public by Steven Druker, an attorney who initiated a lawsuit against the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that forced it to divulge its files on GM foods.

Not too long ago, it was "conventional wisdom" that margarine with trans-fats was better than butter. "Conventional wisdom" is usually wrong.

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The guy who realized washing hands before surgery was committed to a nuthouse because no one believed him. Decades later everyone knows he was unquestionably correct.

Yeah, but that can't happen _now_… (/me ignores)

[–]Troll 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I actually tried to prevent this by having /v/coontown become a containment sub. Some of the retarded WN moderators -- who thought modding European88 AKA Joshua Ryne (((Goldberg))) was a good idea -- decided to overwrite me yet again. They tried to get more subscriptions to TheRightStuff.biz so they could be e-personalities in a wonderful scene lording over terrific people.

We got Evalion famous, we called reddit out for lying about their free speech credentials, and helped start the alt-right. What did those guys get? An interview with Mike Enoch on a shitty podcast! Congrats!

What's even more hilarious is they kept calling me a jewish shill, while /v/niggers current moderator is a fucking jewish cat lady. I remember the fond days of teaming up with a guy named "anti-racist", after a moderator gave me mod access to /v/niggers, to flood their board with scat porn by hijacking the CSS and forcing all /v/niggers viewings to be of interracial coprophagia. They weren't pleased, but I thought it was an improvement.

My viewing of the manipulation was more that it was the need for people with bad personal lives to proselytize and find a captive audience. That group was far too idiotic to ever organize (we tried).

[–]10PoundPoop 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Left reddit recently. Tried out Voat and while I knew that there would be some pretty toxic shit I didn't realize that was like 99% of the content. Not that I care or anything, but it was just boring as hell.

Said it seems to be on the right path. Just need some more people to start building the subs and adding content. I have no doubt that more and more people will keep leaving reddit and looking for an alternative

[–]Alduin[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree 100% with this comment. I don't care that there are racists or others that I disagree with. In fact I support their right to express their opinion. It's when there's nothing else because they've chased all the normal people away that it's a problem.

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

Voat wasn't always like that. And that's just one of the problems we have to keep from happening to Saidit.

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

Here are my thoughts, I think anything should be open for intelligent debate. My own distaste, dislike, or disdain for how anyone chooses to view any topic, I care not what another's 'position' is, as long as they're able to engage in debate, and it has merit to said belief; it had better be good, but I think all should have their opinion; anything designed to stop it, is truly what's wrong in the world today as seen on tv, and media. I do pick hotbed topics, and I'm definitely in the mindset that our world is in some serious trouble.
To further this thought, as many of my posts vent towards, I do believe we're being turned into a society where we must regularly 'tune in', to see the 'approved reactions' to any given topic, and thus most discussions are formed based off of how we're told to view xyz. I think we're being turned completely reactionary; which is necessary for a "Command, and Control" new order; think USSR on a global scale. It's where we're heading, and I do believe psychological warfare is being used in mass.
My point for this post, is that I hope Saidit, can truly foster a platform void of followers; perhaps filling with people who seek personal enlightenment in our limited experiences here on this temporal world.

[–]Fruitsi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I really want to stress OPs point again. I love the layout of this website, the mission statement and the dedication to a free and open conversation. HOWEVER, I will never visit if it turns into even a tenth of what Voat is now. I don't want racism. I don't want people calling for a white nation free of immigrants. I want a fun, happy and most of all, normal site.

So far I haven't seen evidence to either way. But I'm hoping for the absolute best.

[–]sawboss 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I don't want racism.

It's one of the ugliest facets of human societies. Sadly, racism seems to be a "feature" of human nature which I doubt will ever be fully expunged. There are evolutionary reasons for promoting the interests of your own nearest relatives over others.

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

I agree. Sadly, I don't think it will change. However, I do hope that Saidit does not attract the racist crowrd.

[–]Divine_Lotus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

There are evolutionary reasons for promoting the interests of your own nearest relatives over others.

How does racism and evolution match up?

I've grown up with those not 'of my own blood' and despite racist remarks/tendaancies from family members I feel that we're one and the same in terms of being in this life. Especially when life gets rough, when you're generally alone, and your family/'kind' doesn't support you for reasons that may have something to do with ego/fear.

Reminds me of a quote:

"Family isn't whose blood you carry. It's who you love and who loves you." - Bob Ho in The Spy Next Door

Sources with picture evidence:

Twitter https://twitter.com/EyeOfJackieChan/status/211601737985957888

Facebook http://fb.me/1R0RZ0rh1

[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

So you won't mind if I cook your children to feed my own family?

[–]Divine_Lotus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I have no clear answer to that as there are many factors and implications, so maybe reading things up about this may help. Articles search: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=racism+and+evolution+site%3A.edu&t=h_&ia=web

[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah, I'm not gonna starve.

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

So you believe that's the only way to survive for yourself and your family?

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

If I do will you freely give your children to be eaten by my family?

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

How does that relate to racism and evolution?

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

We're getting there further down.

[–]Jesus 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I agree, and shills will come, I already see them here. The one thing that makes TPTB scur'd is free speech and an autonomous human being.

[–]Chop_Chop 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

I was "voated" right out of my own subverse (that I built over a couple years) by a flying monkey brigade straight out of hell. Some of the most disgusting people I've ever seen on the net in years. It's like Lord of the Fleas over there. It is truly disturbing that some of these despicable cretins are actually walking around in public, really.

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

They actually have mod elections there? Terrible.

[–]Chop_Chop 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

They actually have mod elections there? Terrible.

Not in my case, a racist posted a terribly racist post and I deleted it, then that racist flipped out and posted the deletion to v/freespeech (or whatever, can't remember the sub) and his/her pals got together and downvoted me to where I couldn't even post in my own subverse, as the brilliant ringleader of Voat instituted a rule that anyone with -10 downvotes couldn't post new articles. It was infuriating, but only for a few hours because who cares. Those people (most of them anyway) are repulsive.

[–]Troll 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That sounds about right! They really are the scum of the earth. If you're posted about how you hated Electronic Arts, they'd bring up the Jews, which would be off-topic and worthy of deletion, then they'd whine about how you were "censoring" them.

I'm a /r/coontown founding mod and I'm saying this, lol.

And the -10 point can't post in your own sub was hilarious, happened to me too.

[–]hypernormalize 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

Any sufficiently anonymous online community eventually becomes extremely right-wing.

[–]Jesus 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

And mostly by shills and honeypots.

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

Or left-wing, depending on the bias of the owners. (Ribbit)

[–]trevmon 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

but not too far left on the economy , and batshit insane only on social issues

[–]hypernormalize 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I forgot to add the part about not limiting conversation, which is what makes things move to the right.

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

agreed, if you censor something that someone is saying, that to them makes them even more sure they are true. and as you censor anything even slightly right wing, they start going further right

Would be best to just allow them to say things and disprove them with facts, but they can't, so just censor. SJWs have been lead t obelieve that nazism is coming back so they need to censor but that is them being manipulated

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

Totalitarian.

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

Do you think that would happen here?

[–]HoveringOrb 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

The racist subs decided they weren't getting enough attention

Alt reichers are the most delicate of snowflakes, and require constant validation to keep their insecurities at bay.

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

I wouldn't call myself a right-winger by any means - but that statement seems a little one sided.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (19 children)

Looks like someone is already trying to flood new with a bunch of anti-Israeli stuff

[–]trevmon 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

I'm anti israel, I think it should be ok to discuss, but not go overboard

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Absolutely! It should be fine to discuss. But a discussion means listening as well and not pushing an agenda by flooding the site with propaganda. My main concern is what the OP mentioned in his post, that the site gets co-opted. I was there for whoaverse as well (later Voat) and the site definitely didn't start out the way it is now. I like the free speech aspect, but the site is so bigoted as to be basically unusable to me and imagine many others. At the same time, I don't want it to end up like reddit either where only the most left-wing, SJW, views are ok to express.

[–]sawboss 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

I like the free speech aspect

Me too, but Voat is free speech in name only. The karma system inhibits participation from minority opinions. It's also pretty damn discouraging to get dogpiled by dozens or even hundreds of downvoats when asking honest questions and hoping for an answer. You get no answers, aside from "SHILL DETECTED" and such.

[–]trevmon 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

on voat I think everyone is from reddit and left in disgust because reddit is completely overridden by shills and legit people are banned quick. So people on voat go a little overboard with their new found freedom to talk. Also I think there are shills posting racist stuff to make it look like there are white supremacist terrorists increasing due to trump (there aren't).

[–]sawboss 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

people on voat go a little overboard with their new found freedom

Nope. The predominant ethos of Voat, meaning all subs, is explicitly anti-jew, anti-black, and white nationalist in approximately that priority. If you want to farm karma on Voat just write an antisemitic rant or post a ridiculous picture of a black person. If you want to be silenced, write a post which questions that ethos, or suggests the possibility of living peacefully with jews and blacks.

[–]trevmon 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I know what you mean but there are valid reasons to be anti immigrant and jewish control of hollywood and banking system. You can't say that at all on reddit. So they go overboard and not just say that but resort to slurs. I do think that voat will get shut down soon for it. They are already making it invite only and before that you had to wait 24 hours to post, they were trying to keep new people from joining.

[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

there are valid reasons to be anti immigrant and jewish control of hollywood and banking system.

I'm only willing to say that it should be acceptable to question and critique those things. The question of how to respond to objective evidence on the problems of immigration and the prominence of jews has always been a chicken-versus-egg problem for me. To be perfectly clear, are we anti-them because of supposed systemic abuse or instead because they aren't "white"? I've seen some emotionally persuasive arguments both ways, but compelling objective evidence still escapes me. (Maybe I'm just too stupid?)

You can't say that at all on reddit.

Totally. It's only acceptable to express bigotry against whites, cis-heteros, men, conservatives, christians, and Americans on reddit. Not the other way around.

So they go overboard and not just say that but resort to slurs.

Friend, I wish it were just "slurs". I'd be willing to tolerate that much. What I can't tolerate is an oppressive culture which squashes non-conformity at every turn. I need to be free to think my thoughts and ask my questions, and Voat doesn't offer me that much. Hell, I can even get by easier in a (increasingly limited) set of subs on Reddit, as stifling and offensive as the dominant culture is there, but Reddit has been declining in fun and creativity for years and at an accelerating pace.

I do think that voat will get shut down soon for it.

Will it though? I doubt it. I don't think I even want it to shut down. Just let it be and all the WN types will stay in their comfort zone instead of invading other places.

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

you're more free to express your thoughts on voat than reddit. I'm a far left socialist and post there, get replies saying n word and such to me but whatever at least I'm not banned. On reddit I'm banned from most of the main subs, conspiracy, politics, news etc for being too far left and criticizing hillary. I do think writing is on the wall and internet is being large scaled censored.

[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

you're more free to express your thoughts on voat than reddit

Only if my thoughts reinforce the prevailing ethos. And honestly, there are many, many, MANY other things I'd like to discuss.

[–]jacobi 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

valid reasons to be anti Jewish control of Hollywood and banking system.

I would agree, and I think the most concise way to sum that up would to criticize it on systemic grounds, or that it's an issue of privilege. It seems like much of the Voat crowd hates Jews because they're Jews, which is obviously racist and not worth entertaining. What's your take?

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

I think most of it is israeli shills who say outlandish stuff to try to make legit talk about jewish conspiracies look bad in comparison. Then tho there are some legit people who get carried away, what it boils down to there is the economy in the end, a lot of middle class people have been displaced and the economy never recovered from 2008 and that was caused by a lot of jewish bankers so the hatred and furiousness has just festered.

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

...caused by a lot of jewish bankers...

I get that, I just wish they would focus on the fact that they are bankers, rather than jewish. It's the more relevant trait, no? That seems to me like a more effective starting point for affecting meaningful help for those economically and/or left behind.

[–]wizzwizz4 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's been going on for a while. There's a particular sock network that nobody's been banning because they don't want the "oh saidit is CENSORING MY FREE SPEECH!11" rhetoric everywhere.

But the admins are this close.

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

The test will be when things counter to that are posted.

I haven't had time to submit posts and I don't follow a lot of stuff regarding events in the Middle East so I'm not that person.

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

It ought to be acceptable to question and critique world powers and their policies.

[–]nadir18 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I say a good Huxley's irrelevant culture slew of good-natured memes could do the case. Change the perspective of Saidit's be yourself mentality (not that's a bad thing, it's just the shit flingers... ya know, fling) to a place where you can get some pure comedic enjoyment.

I haven't seen one, but a text joke sub, updated every hour, could do wonders. Humor is the greatest unifier after all.

[–]DegenerateFurfag69 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Believe it or not, it wasn't always that unanimously and weirdly white supremacist. It was just the free speech site, and there were pretty normal people there. This was true even after reddit dumped all their worst, most hateful people off there. It was always like everybody hated everybody else, but then they just accepted being hated by each other because they all at least had a love of free speech in common. There were people of every political persuasion. Left wingers, libertarians... Other races too. As long as you didn't get offended easily, you fit right in!

As a Voat user since 2014, THIS THIS THIS. I don't mind Freddy Fundie posting on Voat or Kiwi Farms. What bugs the shit out of me is Freddy Fundie being the universal opinion on Voat instead of having plenty of people who disagree with him.

Once upon a time in the mythical past Voat users on non-TRP/non-ideological subs weren't arguing that abortion is too easy and women should be jobless stay-at-home moms because women working outside the home is caused by feminism urging "careers" and globalists wanting more worker units.

For another example that really sticks in my craw, there was a time when FatPeopleHate had lots of trans users like SkelAngel and ShitLittlePrince, it wasn't the unanimous view that "trannies need to get their delusions fixed by a shrink instead of getting hormones." Now the userbase is dogmatic enough that all the medical science you present is handwaved away because it disagrees with the "trannies are delusional" dogma.

The exact same thing happened on Kiwi Farms. 2015 and 2016 Kiwi Farms threads distinguished between normal trans people and transtrender lolcows. 2017 and 2018 Kiwi Farms threads act like Leelah Alcorn's parents did the right thing and Paul McHugh is a genius superscientist--that it's bad for people to get hormones so they don't look like hons. I don't know what happened to make Kiwi Farms turn from being atheists like Marsmar who laughed at Sonichu invoking GodBearJesus and telling kids to "stay straight" to being "the media is controlled by satan" Bible-thumpers who get upvoted out the wazoo for quoting the New Testament verse against crossdressing, but I hate the change. As someone who grew up evangelical, seeing that happen on Voat and Kiwi Farms is like being Yuri Bezmenov or Victor Kravchenko and seeing Americans around you who've never had to actually live under the shit cheer for communism. The whole reason I've been posting Voat, Kiwi Farms and CringeAnarchy comments to FSTDT.com isn't because I'm offended and want it censored. It's because it's cathartic to get contact with non-fundies who go "yeah, that's batshit crazy" instead of me being the lone non-fundie in a thread.

I mean, /r/yiff had a Voat spinoff. When I posted a "free speech for everyone, including unpopular speech" quote several years ago when Voat was in alpha stage, it was upvoted out the wazoo. I do the same thing now, and everyone on /v/Libertarian is a Hoppean "remove anti-libertarian/anti-white speech" type if they're libertarian at all.

The truth is nobody cared that we had a /v/niggers or whatever other offensive sub. It was fine, because for the most part every group stuck to their subs.

^ ^ ^

Also, the nonwhite users on FatPeopleHate were our best posters.