With all the reddit users coming over lately, I wanted to share something. This is what happened to Voat.

submitted by Alduin from self.propaganda

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7[A] 95 insightful - 8 fun95 insightful - 7 fun96 insightful - 8 fun -  (35 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 37 insightful - 7 fun37 insightful - 6 fun38 insightful - 7 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 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed wholeheartedly.

[–]Troll 14 insightful - 8 fun14 insightful - 7 fun15 insightful - 8 fun -  (4 children)

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 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 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/

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

I really want to see what the average voater's home life is like.

I don't know about their homelife, but apparently their thought process is that everything bad is caused by Jews. If you disagree with that, you are of course a Jew. If you don't agree with them in exactly the right way, you're still a Jew.

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

But that part about "caused by Jews" is true. But my take is that if you disagree with that, you are just ignorant. I used to be a Voater, I live with my wife and our 2 dogs. We tried having kids, but having only met each other at age 40, it was a bit late in the window, and the babies didn't stick in her belly. Either way, no kids. We are in our 50s now.

Our home life is relatively normal: I am very ill for the last decade or more with Lyme disease and who knows what the fuck else - I suspect mercury toxicity from filling removal, given how my mind is a small fraction of what it used to be. So I stay home, and try to do some work, earn some money during the short time windows where I am somewhat clear-headed and conscious, so my wife earns all the money. She also has her office in our home, so we are all 4 of us all the time together in the same place. And we love it. If you need "men time" with just your male buddies, you are a little bit homosexual.

Oh, I almost forgot: Sieg Heil! =D

And also this: https://files.catbox.moe/fk9w0b.mp4

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

But everything that's wrong with the world IS caused by Jews.

[–]zyxzevn 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 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 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 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 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 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 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

The Overton Pillow Fight Slumber Party.

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

The Overton Michael Jackson tickle fight.

[–]zyxzevn 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 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 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 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 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 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 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 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...

[–]Amplitude 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 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 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 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 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 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 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 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.

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

I totally agree about the election meddling of Reddit.

As far as voat, I'm an outsider to it. But here is what I see on the front page:

A cow having fun with his friend.

Google translate turns far-left extremists into far-right extremists (media.8kun.top)

BREAKING: US Withdraws From World Health Organization and Democrats Are Losing It (thegatewaypundit.com)

Daily Reminder: Always Capitalize the W in White (whatever)

Just a bump in the road (files.catbox.moe)

I picked a random residential street in Johannesburg, South Africa to street-view in Google Earth. HOLY SHIT!!! Walled-off houses, razor wire, spiked fences, security systems, surveillance cameras... (pic8.co)

Group genomics drive aggression in honey bees- Genes are very important in every organism - EXCEPT HUMANS GOY!!! (phys.org)

Russian Cop Pops a Tranny (files.catbox.moe)

Modern art is just tax evasion for the rich (i.pinimg.com)

Senior researcher at Michigan State University fired for sharing a study proving no widespread racial bias in police shootings (infowars.com)

Should I go to college, community college or a trade school? (AskVoat)

I count 2 separatist/semetic (sic) things out of 11. Maybe that's too high for some, but maybe I just have a strong stomach. Or maybe just I'm used to reddit which has a far higher "this is trash" hit rate than that. Sure, it might not be saying ze jewz are the problem (they hate white/conservatives/dissenters instead), but if we are comparing the two, this anecdote is evidence that reddit is far worse of a cesspit.

[–]Node 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 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 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 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 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 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 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

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

[–]Troll 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

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

[–]magnora7 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 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 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, gotcha.

[–]muhammad 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

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

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

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

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

Yeah, regular browser works fine.

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

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

[–]aggrjgoigoiaj 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 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/

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

I am in absolute love with the lack of downvoting here. If I dont like some dipshit brigading or obvious shill, ill just block them

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

I think jewish interests may very well have taken over Voat in order to identify the most jew-aware individuals. That idea is my one reason for not spending most of my time over there. But at least people over there ARE jew-aware. I mean most people are looking at the world going to shit in front of their eyes, and look back with an empty, glassy-eyed stare at anyone pointing out what SHOULD be obvious Jewish reason for all of that. There is a lot of education to be performed in here.