"When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know, the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how holy the motives." ~ Robert A. Heinlein.

GENUINE · 2019-03-19T01:27:59+00:00

I've not watched it either, but beheading videos often have fewer victims and are more set up in a way to be presentable (for lack of a better word).

Given how many people describe the shooting as similar to a video game, I can't help but think back to the Modern Warfare 2 mission, called "No Russian", in which you're made to walk through the airport with others and gun down innocent civilians.

GENUINE · 2019-03-19T01:25:56+00:00

I'm not so sure about the first part. I can see their reasoning behind censoring it - it's not unlikely that it might inspire some people to carry out similar attacks, especially when you look at the disturbing number of people applauding the attacker after watching the video.

The latter part makes a lot of sense and I do believe that Trump knows what he's doing by being a controversial figure. He managed to achieve a sweet spot in controversy where people who like him and dislike him talk about him a decent amount.

GENUINE · 2019-03-18T22:33:57+00:00

I did hear a little about that, it surprises me that the admins didn't do anything about it.

I really hope this place doesn't end up the same way.

GENUINE · 2019-03-18T22:31:00+00:00

I'll admit I'm the same way too, sometimes. But it rubs me the wrong way when people don't admit it and instead put on some freedom of information activist gimmick, combined with "slippery slope" scenarios.

GENUINE · 2019-03-18T19:40:02+00:00

I never checked the Donald Trump subreddit enough to gauge its vibe, what were the biggest issues with it that would merit a ban?

GENUINE · 2019-03-18T19:19:09+00:00

Internet censorship that some people complain about nowadays comes off more as reverse psychology more than anything else.

There's a strong urge that emerges among a lot of people to share that New Zealand shooting video, because they were told they were not allowed.

GENUINE · 2019-03-18T19:15:54+00:00

promotes or encourages criminal acts or acts of terrorism

This was what I took from the video's censorship, and also why I didn't understand the controversy behind it. Why is it such a big issue that people aren't allowed to see/distribute the video? Is it that attitude where being told what you can't do pushes you to rebel?

GENUINE · 2019-03-18T19:12:52+00:00

Thanks.

antiextremes.com

I assume that this means your intention was to avoid anything like Voat or Raddle (the lesser-known, very left Reddit alternative).

But is it ever possible to remain neutral? People aligning with the alt-right often use their "facts not feelings" motto, and usually hide the heavy hatred behind "logical" paragraphs (I'm sure we've all seen the same PewResearch paragraph parroted hundreds of times), and in the times I've seen it occur they're almost always posting/commenting with an agenda, not to discuss.

Even if you don't want it to become overrun by one side, couldn't it potentially do so if a large number of users from that side dominate SaidIt, and end up defining the website's standing?

GENUINE · 2019-03-18T18:46:09+00:00

I found out about this website today.

Is it going to end up like Voat? I stayed well away from there due to the heavy alt-right presence. It's not so prevalent on Reddit, but definitely becomes repetitive and exhausting on there also.

What's unique about this site?

GENUINE