3 ms·
That's why you want to participate under a different pseudonym. If you're OK with participating at all, that is.
by jarfil 8y ago
That's why you want to participate under a different pseudonym. If you're OK with participating at all, that is.
- jim-jim-jim 8y agoI don't want to participate at all. What I'm saying is that I'm pro free speech and decentralization, but if all the content is just racist shit, then what draw does the community have for me in the first place? Assuming the motivations behind them are genuine (a big assumption), then there's nothing inherently wrong with BitChute, Voat, Gab, etc. But the actual content on these platforms is the polar opposite of the "diversity of thought" they claim to promote. That may not necessarily even be the site owners' faults (again: a very generous assumption), but a set of circumstances that arises from who actually takes advantage of "free speech" in practice. I don't have any good answer for how to address that contradiction.
- jstanley 8y agoI don't see why the "contradiction" needs to be addressed. If you want to publish non-racist videos, you can publish them on BitChute without endorsing the racist videos.
- jim-jim-jim 8y agoI don't publish videos. I watch them. I'm not gonna bother flipping through 90% nonsense on the off chance there's something interesting available. There's nothing technical that prevents sane people from uploading videos on BitChute, but there's not as strong as an incentive for them to do so. The platforms are fundamentally good ideas. There just needs to be a way to bootstrap a diverse community before they're killed in the cradle by angry nerds. To observe the ideological flipside of this conundrum, I invite you to browse many Mastodon instances, where discourse is driven by the most unbearable carelords imaginable.