3 ms·

Well, I don't have an account, but this blew up sufficiently enough that I only needed to click "explore" and stumbled on a repost containing a screenshot of th

Well, I don't have an account, but this blew up sufficiently enough that I only needed to click "explore" and stumbled on a repost containing a screenshot of the original post. Here you go: https://gab.ai/PNN/posts/31263515 https://gab.ai/PNN/posts/31263515 Wow, what a sad website. I don't quite understand the mindset/vitriol/hate/anger/etc here (the reason for it or need for it) psychologically speaking. In any case I've taken my own simple screenshots of the repost in case it disappears, which I expect will happen eventually. If anyone absolutely needs them let me know.

s9w 8y ago
> Wow, what a sad website How is a website sad just because it offers true free speech? I think it's sad the the perception of free speech is being tainted in such a bad light. Free speech is _only_ relevant if it covers the controversial things, too.
- exikyut 8y ago
  Right, I'm referring to the implementation, not the theory/back-of-napkin goal. I say that this particular website is full of what I would broadly/sweepingly describe as toxicity. Not 100.00% full - there are surely a few people in there that are balanced - but I have no inclination to field the noise ratio to find them; the process would be too depressing. This is a rough description of what I mean by "sad". I do completely agree that free speech is necessary - for things like oppressive dictatorships in foreign countries, hardware ownership versus do-not-debug laws, and broadcasting events that the mainstream media have blacklisted. I don't think free speech is for racism, which I don't believe in in any case: we all bleed red, there's no point going rabid over an arbitrary bunch of people, since any grouping (of anything groupable) that scales large enough will net you all the "look how bad this is" statistics you could possibly want, which completely devalidates the basis of racism et al in the first place (IMO).
  - s9w 8y ago
    > I don't think free speech is for racism "Free speech without x" is not free speech. Also you don't need to look to look as far as "oppressive dictatorships in foreign countries" for a need for free speech. Over 50 people had their homes raided in the middle of the night for criticizing the government. edit: in Germany I meant

s9w 8y ago

> Wow, what a sad website How is a website sad just because it offers true free speech? I think it's sad the the perception of free speech is being tainted in such a bad light. Free speech is _only_ relevant if it covers the controversial things, too.

exikyut 8y ago
Right, I'm referring to the implementation, not the theory/back-of-napkin goal. I say that this particular website is full of what I would broadly/sweepingly describe as toxicity. Not 100.00% full - there are surely a few people in there that are balanced - but I have no inclination to field the noise ratio to find them; the process would be too depressing. This is a rough description of what I mean by "sad". I do completely agree that free speech is necessary - for things like oppressive dictatorships in foreign countries, hardware ownership versus do-not-debug laws, and broadcasting events that the mainstream media have blacklisted. I don't think free speech is for racism, which I don't believe in in any case: we all bleed red, there's no point going rabid over an arbitrary bunch of people, since any grouping (of anything groupable) that scales large enough will net you all the "look how bad this is" statistics you could possibly want, which completely devalidates the basis of racism et al in the first place (IMO).
- s9w 8y ago
  > I don't think free speech is for racism "Free speech without x" is not free speech. Also you don't need to look to look as far as "oppressive dictatorships in foreign countries" for a need for free speech. Over 50 people had their homes raided in the middle of the night for criticizing the government. edit: in Germany I meant