6 ms·

anybody know of communities that dont excessively moderate or censor? tildes looks interesting but the founder says, "it will also never be described as anythi

by modzu 8y ago

anybody know of communities that dont excessively moderate or censor? tildes looks interesting but the founder says, "it will also never be described as anything like "an absolute free speech site". i would love to find a community that moderates harrassment, actual hate speech, and threats, but nothing else. for example ive seen comments deleted here on hn related to drug culture, presumably because a drug is illegal in the usa. in other words, a community interested in truth, no matter how messy it is.

berberous 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network) The founder was kicked out of YC. I've never actually read it, since its insistence on "absolute free speech" just causes it to be overrun by the worst users that no other service wants.
intertextuality 8y ago
Normally I would agree with you, but websites that describe themselves as “absolute free speech” usually attract assholes. It sounds like tilde here is just being honest. They likely do minimal moderation.
- 8note 8y ago
  i think that's usually "good moderation is expensive, and we can't afford it"
8note 8y ago
I think this is a good description of why an absolute free speech site will never flourish: https://youtu.be/r3snVCRo_bI https://youtu.be/r3snVCRo_bI what you describe is basically just Reddit, but with the people nobody wants to talk to on Reddit ... so mostly just the people you don't want to talk to on Reddit talking to each other,which has no mass appeal
- Grue3 8y ago
  There was a time when Usenet has fluorished. History repeats itself, so never say never.
- acct1771 8y ago
  "Nobody" except all the people who do. I personally seek the most undesirable opinions in the depths of the worst comment sections - because there's knowledge about the world to be gleaned from all of that that I'll use as a competitive advantage against someone who couldn't be bothered to read something "icky" for a few seconds.
  - krapp 8y ago
    >because there's knowledge about the world to be gleaned from all of that that I'll use as a competitive advantage against someone who couldn't be bothered to read something "icky" for a few seconds. Competitive advantage? What secret wisdom, exactly, do you think the racists, pedos and trolls of the web possess and casually discuss that would give you anything of the sort? People already know what such groups believe and how little value they add to society. They're not the fucking Illuminati, and you're not breaking new ground by seeking them out.
    - bfuller 8y ago
      That's the thing though. The comments at the bottom aren't only racists pedos and trolls, there are also valid opinions that the hive mind has rejected.
      - krapp 8y ago
        There's no hivemind. Calling an opposing view part of a hivemind implies that people who disagree with you are either following a script or are incapable of agency, self-awareness or independent thought, when they simply hold opinions and values different from your own. I use HN with showdead on by default, and I sometimes post a userscript for people to uncensor comments and I've complained about the greying out of downvoted comments often ... I understand wanting to read everything and make your own decisions about what's worth reading rather than have others make them for you. However, most of what winds up flagged deserves to be. Look at the flagged comment at the bottom of this thread, for example. It's just a rant against the "global socialist LEFT." There's nothing there that no one has read before. Even if you agree with the "validity" of the opinion, it's just stereotypical anti-leftist edgelord nonsense. And now and then, albeit rarely, perfectly legitimate and inoffensive comments do get flagged. I try to vouch them when I can. But even then, I have yet to see anything I'd consider a true jewel in the rough. There seems to be a trend among people to consider content that goes against the establishment to be inherently more valuable than that which goes with it, as if offensiveness maps to truth. Seek the bottom of the barrel out if you want, but I think it's a mistake to expect enlightenment from it.
danvayn 8y ago
I co-run a discourse community that basically operates on these rules. Absolutely nobody has been banned and weve had many...odd people come by at one point or another. Id rather not name it but I think the kind of thing youre describing is less rare than you think. It just relies on your existing userbase having thick skin and the willingness to self-moderate and come up with creative solutions for problematic users.
- bloodorange 8y ago
  Would you happen to have any advice on cultivating such a community?
krapp 8y ago
You realize a lot of people consider moderating harassment, hate speech and threats to simply be a pretext for excessive moderation though, right? Almost every thread about $site's moderation policy devolves into arguments about whether "actual hate speech" even exists (there are people who consider what other people consider hate speech to be "messy truth" after all), or whether any form of moderation can exist on a site that claims to support free speech. The standard you're setting isn't an unrealized ideal - it's how many online communities already work, and those communities are still rejected because the boundaries they set are inevitably boundaries others consider intolerable. There are few, if any, sites on the open web which allow "absolute free speech" because that, by definition, would allow hate speech, threats, open discussion of pedophilia and and other illegal activity. And honestly, almost no one wants that except the assholes, pedos and criminals. Even setting the bar to "anything, so long as it isn't illegal" is tricky, because legality varies from place to place, and the site owner is bound to follow the laws of wherever the server is (AFAIK.) > example ive seen comments deleted here on hn related to drug culture, presumably because a drug is illegal in the usa I've seen plenty of pro-drug content here, and people discussing their use openly. I doubt there is widespread censorship on that basis, more likely someone was being uncivil. Although arguably requiring civility is, itself, a kind of censorship. Also, threads here are never actually deleted, just marked as dead. You can still see them with showdead turned on.
- modzu 8y ago
  i could just as easily say, "almost no one wants a hacker discussion forum". "hackers" are a small subset of society. it's fine for hn to exist and cater to this group, right? yet here, humor, satire, and a variety of "OK" things to discuss and share are considered off-topic and not permitted. just like when hn started and people thought it would just turn into reddit, i do think its possible for a forum where free speech is celebrated to not turn into a nazi club. i'm glad we have law abiding individuals in society. but make no mistake, laws and morals are not equal, and indeed if we cannot have a space to discuss things that are illegal but possibly moral, we're talking dystopia
  - DoreenMichele 8y ago
August-Garcia 8y ago
Similar subject areas to HN: https://www.256kilobytes.com/ https://www.256kilobytes.com/ Only posts removed are spam and felonies.

by modzu 8y ago

berberous 8y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network) The founder was kicked out of YC. I've never actually read it, since its insistence on "absolute free speech" just causes it to be overrun by the worst users that no other service wants.

intertextuality 8y ago

Normally I would agree with you, but websites that describe themselves as “absolute free speech” usually attract assholes. It sounds like tilde here is just being honest. They likely do minimal moderation.

8note 8y ago
i think that's usually "good moderation is expensive, and we can't afford it"

8note 8y ago

I think this is a good description of why an absolute free speech site will never flourish: https://youtu.be/r3snVCRo_bI https://youtu.be/r3snVCRo_bI what you describe is basically just Reddit, but with the people nobody wants to talk to on Reddit ... so mostly just the people you don't want to talk to on Reddit talking to each other,which has no mass appeal

Grue3 8y ago
There was a time when Usenet has fluorished. History repeats itself, so never say never.
acct1771 8y ago
"Nobody" except all the people who do. I personally seek the most undesirable opinions in the depths of the worst comment sections - because there's knowledge about the world to be gleaned from all of that that I'll use as a competitive advantage against someone who couldn't be bothered to read something "icky" for a few seconds.
- krapp 8y ago
  >because there's knowledge about the world to be gleaned from all of that that I'll use as a competitive advantage against someone who couldn't be bothered to read something "icky" for a few seconds. Competitive advantage? What secret wisdom, exactly, do you think the racists, pedos and trolls of the web possess and casually discuss that would give you anything of the sort? People already know what such groups believe and how little value they add to society. They're not the fucking Illuminati, and you're not breaking new ground by seeking them out.
  - bfuller 8y ago
    That's the thing though. The comments at the bottom aren't only racists pedos and trolls, there are also valid opinions that the hive mind has rejected.
    - krapp 8y ago
      There's no hivemind. Calling an opposing view part of a hivemind implies that people who disagree with you are either following a script or are incapable of agency, self-awareness or independent thought, when they simply hold opinions and values different from your own. I use HN with showdead on by default, and I sometimes post a userscript for people to uncensor comments and I've complained about the greying out of downvoted comments often ... I understand wanting to read everything and make your own decisions about what's worth reading rather than have others make them for you. However, most of what winds up flagged deserves to be. Look at the flagged comment at the bottom of this thread, for example. It's just a rant against the "global socialist LEFT." There's nothing there that no one has read before. Even if you agree with the "validity" of the opinion, it's just stereotypical anti-leftist edgelord nonsense. And now and then, albeit rarely, perfectly legitimate and inoffensive comments do get flagged. I try to vouch them when I can. But even then, I have yet to see anything I'd consider a true jewel in the rough. There seems to be a trend among people to consider content that goes against the establishment to be inherently more valuable than that which goes with it, as if offensiveness maps to truth. Seek the bottom of the barrel out if you want, but I think it's a mistake to expect enlightenment from it.

danvayn 8y ago

I co-run a discourse community that basically operates on these rules. Absolutely nobody has been banned and weve had many...odd people come by at one point or another. Id rather not name it but I think the kind of thing youre describing is less rare than you think. It just relies on your existing userbase having thick skin and the willingness to self-moderate and come up with creative solutions for problematic users.

bloodorange 8y ago
Would you happen to have any advice on cultivating such a community?

krapp 8y ago

You realize a lot of people consider moderating harassment, hate speech and threats to simply be a pretext for excessive moderation though, right? Almost every thread about $site's moderation policy devolves into arguments about whether "actual hate speech" even exists (there are people who consider what other people consider hate speech to be "messy truth" after all), or whether any form of moderation can exist on a site that claims to support free speech. The standard you're setting isn't an unrealized ideal - it's how many online communities already work, and those communities are still rejected because the boundaries they set are inevitably boundaries others consider intolerable. There are few, if any, sites on the open web which allow "absolute free speech" because that, by definition, would allow hate speech, threats, open discussion of pedophilia and and other illegal activity. And honestly, almost no one wants that except the assholes, pedos and criminals. Even setting the bar to "anything, so long as it isn't illegal" is tricky, because legality varies from place to place, and the site owner is bound to follow the laws of wherever the server is (AFAIK.) > example ive seen comments deleted here on hn related to drug culture, presumably because a drug is illegal in the usa I've seen plenty of pro-drug content here, and people discussing their use openly. I doubt there is widespread censorship on that basis, more likely someone was being uncivil. Although arguably requiring civility is, itself, a kind of censorship. Also, threads here are never actually deleted, just marked as dead. You can still see them with showdead turned on.

modzu 8y ago
i could just as easily say, "almost no one wants a hacker discussion forum". "hackers" are a small subset of society. it's fine for hn to exist and cater to this group, right? yet here, humor, satire, and a variety of "OK" things to discuss and share are considered off-topic and not permitted. just like when hn started and people thought it would just turn into reddit, i do think its possible for a forum where free speech is celebrated to not turn into a nazi club. i'm glad we have law abiding individuals in society. but make no mistake, laws and morals are not equal, and indeed if we cannot have a space to discuss things that are illegal but possibly moral, we're talking dystopia
- DoreenMichele 8y ago

August-Garcia 8y ago

Similar subject areas to HN: https://www.256kilobytes.com/ https://www.256kilobytes.com/ Only posts removed are spam and felonies.