8 ms·

Agreed, the irony of /r/conservative complaining about censorship or their rights to free speech being restricted while making submitting posts and commenting "

Agreed, the irony of /r/conservative complaining about censorship or their rights to free speech being restricted while making submitting posts and commenting "flaired users only" (AKA only the users who agree with us and think the same way) is completely lost on them...

hef19898 6y ago
I am slowly suspecting that being capable of tremendous levels of cognitive disoance, without realizing it, is one of the common denominators of radicals. Quite obvious in right wingers, but I wouldn't exclude others, I just saw it more at the right end of the political spectrum.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  I think what you're looking for individuals that think "I believe" without any proof at all is a valid "reason" for doing whatever they like as long as they "believe" it. It is proof against any science or logical reasoning because "I believe" is the only level of verification they need to follow a group/tyrant/whatever.
- staticautomatic 6y ago
  To the contrary, many radicals, including the ones you’re referring to, are incapable of handling cognitive dissonance. Consider the destitute right-wing radical who fights against economic assistance programs because they conflict with his moral world view.
stjohnswarts 6y ago
Is there something in reddit "bylaws" that says any post has to be accepted in a group that meant specifically for a certain group "/r/..." ? I thought moderators could allow/disallow whatever they wanted as long as it doesn't violate TOS or is illegal? I have seen the same thing in more left leaning, women's rights, or whatever. Am I missing something in your complaint? That said all that the_donald/conservative/etc is a dumpster fire.
- netzone 6y ago
  I believe he was just noting the irony of someone claiming something, then openly not doing so, rather than any rules being broken.
goatgate 6y ago
I discovered this yesterday trying to respond to a post on r/conservative about the CCP enforcing ideological conformity. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
- frankfrankfrank 6y ago
  That strikes me as far more a function of being on reddit. There are no conservatives on reddit and from my own interactions with the people on r/conservative, I can assure you that they are not in fact what they say they are. You may as well go to Weibo looking to advocate against the repressive CCP regime, or you can try it a bit closer to home and advocate for free speech on reddit. Same outcome.
chrisco255 6y ago
Have you ever been to /r/politics? It's a groupthink circle jerk. The difference, of course, is that /r/conservative is explicitly defined as a conservative community while /r/politics implies they are some sort of neutral community which they most certainly are not. At any rate, finding a diverse community of ideological people coming together to discuss politics with intellectual fervor is rather difficult these days. Part of the reason is the design of the software itself. HN does a better job of this than most because of very careful design choices and solid moderation. But if this could be accomplished for politics in general, I think it would be a good thing for society.
- thebigman433 6y ago
  I think the difference is that r/politics doesnt actually ban you for posting something conservative, its just the users deciding they dont like it. I dont use it either way due to their horrible link rules, but there is definitely a difference in my opinion.
  - vbezhenar 6y ago
    You're silenced by moderators or you're silenced by users. I don't see much difference in the end.
    - lc9er 6y ago
      The difference is that the community observed your opinion and decided it provided no value. That could be a pro or con, based on many factors.
    - rootusrootus 6y ago
      There's a huge difference. The freedom to disagree is a fundamental part of free speech. The very fact that you get a big response from the community means you are definitely being heard. They just don't agree with you. When moderators do it, nobody even sees what you are saying.
    - jimbokun 6y ago
turtle_san 6y ago
There is a huge difference between a platform censoring/banning you and a community on the platform censoring/banning you. No irony involved. That subreddit is just trying to have discussion among like minded people without trolls and brigaders disrupting everything, they are a highly targeted subreddit for those acts. Reddit as a platform still exists for you and joining or making new communities is possible at the click of a button. Contrast that with having to create your own platform which is prohibitive, or migrating to another platform (if one even exists), which is also prohibitive. And now we have a most recent grievance of a group getting removed from all platforms, creating their own platform, only for it to be removed from existence by mobile devices and web infrastructure dropping it.
- kungito 6y ago
  Wasn't the_donald subreddit doing a lot of brigading and censoring not just the trolls but anyone with a differing opinion?
- bena 6y ago
  > That subreddit is just trying to have discussion among like minded people without trolls and brigaders disrupting everything I love this incredibly sanitized version of what goes on in /r/conservative.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  It's totally fine to create a closed group to talk amongst like-minded people, just don't try to make a claim that it's superior or pro-free-speech. To the credit of the moderators of r/conservative, they don't really claim that, though some of their users try to. They're very open about their intentions. They absolutely do not welcome non-tribe members.
bmarquez 6y ago
/r/conservative moderates their platform to accept all types of conservatives, including the authoritarian "let's spend all our money on the military and censor everything we don't like" types. They also took in an massive influx of new users after the_donald was banned which permanently changed its discourse. And as the biggest right-leaning political subreddit, r/conservative also took in an influx of people posting death threats and insults due to its visibility. Examples are occasionally screenshotted by the moderators, and I'm not surprised they moved to 'flaired users only' to keep up with moderation. Smaller government, free-speech conservatives on Reddit tend to hang out in more libertarian subreddits.
- supernovae 6y ago
  Those "more libertarian subreddits" seem to have similar behaviors...
  - bmarquez 6y ago
    Examples? "Flaired users only" doesn't exist in any of the other subreddits I frequent, and all subreddits (even non-political ones) reserve the right to remove off-topic or uncivil comments.
  - spiralx 6y ago
    /r/libertarian was famously unmoderated for years until the drama a couple of years when the head moderator finally resurfaced and decided to step in after alt-right mods took over the sub: https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/ajg8ng/rlibertarian_gets_restored_after_an_alleged/eevs7jg/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/ajg8ng/rlib... Slashdot is the only major site that was unmoderated in this sense - during the 10+ years I read it the only post ever removed was one with links to Scientology materials that they'd been threatened with litigation over. They replaced it with an explanation of why they'd removed the comment followed by a bunch of links to anti-Scientology sites :) It had a lot of crap posted there but mostly coped with it, simpler times I think. Their system allowing you to choose the vote threshold for visible posts helped a lot with that.
frankfrankfrank 6y ago
I get that it is a kind of contradiction to claim being about free-speech, but to see their point, when free=speech and they as the primary advocates for free-speech are under clear and direct and persistent and unrelenting assault of their speech and thought, I can see how they would take on practical positions to protect their community from infiltrators and subversives as they are struggling to survive under relentless abuse of power. What you should realize, and this is a general fact, is that when any group is withering under constant barrage and assault by what is really objectively an evil agenda of oppression (freedom of expression is in fact a human right under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), regardless of what you believe or say, they do not have the luxury of high moral consistency while facing free-speech eradication by an evil regime hell bent on controlling all aspects of humanity. And kid yourself not, what the tech companies are doing to suppress free speech is not only purely and objectively evil, it is a threat to the US Constitution, which is the lynchpin and capstone for freedom and liberties all over the world too. If the American Constitution/values of free speech falter as they seem to be, I pity all the poor souls around the world who have lived under an umbrella of the US Constitution who will suffer immensely more and in deafening silence of globe dominating regime censorship. There will be no people to take up the cause, e.g., of the Uighurs if the US regime wants to make nice with the Chinese regime for whatever reason. There will be no reporting of atrocities or even knowledge of the lies that justified the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq and the killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis defending their hime against an evil invasion. There will be what the party wants … ney, demands you believe. Please see the book 1984 for reference. Many say they have read it, I seriously wonder if that is true.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  > protect their community from infiltrators and subversives They see anybody who doesn't toe the Trump line as a brigader from r/politics. Everything is a conspiracy. But there are a number of very moderate conservatives that (for whatever reason) continue to call r/conservative their home, and they respond positively when something sane gets posted. I've had a couple great conversations over there with those folks. I just avoid the endless meme threads and other trashy pointless tribal gunk.
sixothree 6y ago
It's not irony. It's pervasive and it's dishonesty plain and simple.

hef19898 6y ago

I am slowly suspecting that being capable of tremendous levels of cognitive disoance, without realizing it, is one of the common denominators of radicals. Quite obvious in right wingers, but I wouldn't exclude others, I just saw it more at the right end of the political spectrum.

stjohnswarts 6y ago
I think what you're looking for individuals that think "I believe" without any proof at all is a valid "reason" for doing whatever they like as long as they "believe" it. It is proof against any science or logical reasoning because "I believe" is the only level of verification they need to follow a group/tyrant/whatever.
staticautomatic 6y ago
To the contrary, many radicals, including the ones you’re referring to, are incapable of handling cognitive dissonance. Consider the destitute right-wing radical who fights against economic assistance programs because they conflict with his moral world view.

stjohnswarts 6y ago

Is there something in reddit "bylaws" that says any post has to be accepted in a group that meant specifically for a certain group "/r/..." ? I thought moderators could allow/disallow whatever they wanted as long as it doesn't violate TOS or is illegal? I have seen the same thing in more left leaning, women's rights, or whatever. Am I missing something in your complaint? That said all that the_donald/conservative/etc is a dumpster fire.

netzone 6y ago
I believe he was just noting the irony of someone claiming something, then openly not doing so, rather than any rules being broken.

goatgate 6y ago

I discovered this yesterday trying to respond to a post on r/conservative about the CCP enforcing ideological conformity. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

frankfrankfrank 6y ago
That strikes me as far more a function of being on reddit. There are no conservatives on reddit and from my own interactions with the people on r/conservative, I can assure you that they are not in fact what they say they are. You may as well go to Weibo looking to advocate against the repressive CCP regime, or you can try it a bit closer to home and advocate for free speech on reddit. Same outcome.

chrisco255 6y ago

Have you ever been to /r/politics? It's a groupthink circle jerk. The difference, of course, is that /r/conservative is explicitly defined as a conservative community while /r/politics implies they are some sort of neutral community which they most certainly are not. At any rate, finding a diverse community of ideological people coming together to discuss politics with intellectual fervor is rather difficult these days. Part of the reason is the design of the software itself. HN does a better job of this than most because of very careful design choices and solid moderation. But if this could be accomplished for politics in general, I think it would be a good thing for society.

thebigman433 6y ago
I think the difference is that r/politics doesnt actually ban you for posting something conservative, its just the users deciding they dont like it. I dont use it either way due to their horrible link rules, but there is definitely a difference in my opinion.
- vbezhenar 6y ago
  You're silenced by moderators or you're silenced by users. I don't see much difference in the end.
  - lc9er 6y ago
    The difference is that the community observed your opinion and decided it provided no value. That could be a pro or con, based on many factors.
  - rootusrootus 6y ago
    There's a huge difference. The freedom to disagree is a fundamental part of free speech. The very fact that you get a big response from the community means you are definitely being heard. They just don't agree with you. When moderators do it, nobody even sees what you are saying.
  - jimbokun 6y ago

turtle_san 6y ago

There is a huge difference between a platform censoring/banning you and a community on the platform censoring/banning you. No irony involved. That subreddit is just trying to have discussion among like minded people without trolls and brigaders disrupting everything, they are a highly targeted subreddit for those acts. Reddit as a platform still exists for you and joining or making new communities is possible at the click of a button. Contrast that with having to create your own platform which is prohibitive, or migrating to another platform (if one even exists), which is also prohibitive. And now we have a most recent grievance of a group getting removed from all platforms, creating their own platform, only for it to be removed from existence by mobile devices and web infrastructure dropping it.

kungito 6y ago
Wasn't the_donald subreddit doing a lot of brigading and censoring not just the trolls but anyone with a differing opinion?
bena 6y ago
> That subreddit is just trying to have discussion among like minded people without trolls and brigaders disrupting everything I love this incredibly sanitized version of what goes on in /r/conservative.
rootusrootus 6y ago
It's totally fine to create a closed group to talk amongst like-minded people, just don't try to make a claim that it's superior or pro-free-speech. To the credit of the moderators of r/conservative, they don't really claim that, though some of their users try to. They're very open about their intentions. They absolutely do not welcome non-tribe members.

bmarquez 6y ago

/r/conservative moderates their platform to accept all types of conservatives, including the authoritarian "let's spend all our money on the military and censor everything we don't like" types. They also took in an massive influx of new users after the_donald was banned which permanently changed its discourse. And as the biggest right-leaning political subreddit, r/conservative also took in an influx of people posting death threats and insults due to its visibility. Examples are occasionally screenshotted by the moderators, and I'm not surprised they moved to 'flaired users only' to keep up with moderation. Smaller government, free-speech conservatives on Reddit tend to hang out in more libertarian subreddits.

supernovae 6y ago
Those "more libertarian subreddits" seem to have similar behaviors...
- bmarquez 6y ago
  Examples? "Flaired users only" doesn't exist in any of the other subreddits I frequent, and all subreddits (even non-political ones) reserve the right to remove off-topic or uncivil comments.
- spiralx 6y ago
  /r/libertarian was famously unmoderated for years until the drama a couple of years when the head moderator finally resurfaced and decided to step in after alt-right mods took over the sub: https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/ajg8ng/rlibertarian_gets_restored_after_an_alleged/eevs7jg/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/ajg8ng/rlib... Slashdot is the only major site that was unmoderated in this sense - during the 10+ years I read it the only post ever removed was one with links to Scientology materials that they'd been threatened with litigation over. They replaced it with an explanation of why they'd removed the comment followed by a bunch of links to anti-Scientology sites :) It had a lot of crap posted there but mostly coped with it, simpler times I think. Their system allowing you to choose the vote threshold for visible posts helped a lot with that.

frankfrankfrank 6y ago

I get that it is a kind of contradiction to claim being about free-speech, but to see their point, when free=speech and they as the primary advocates for free-speech are under clear and direct and persistent and unrelenting assault of their speech and thought, I can see how they would take on practical positions to protect their community from infiltrators and subversives as they are struggling to survive under relentless abuse of power. What you should realize, and this is a general fact, is that when any group is withering under constant barrage and assault by what is really objectively an evil agenda of oppression (freedom of expression is in fact a human right under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), regardless of what you believe or say, they do not have the luxury of high moral consistency while facing free-speech eradication by an evil regime hell bent on controlling all aspects of humanity. And kid yourself not, what the tech companies are doing to suppress free speech is not only purely and objectively evil, it is a threat to the US Constitution, which is the lynchpin and capstone for freedom and liberties all over the world too. If the American Constitution/values of free speech falter as they seem to be, I pity all the poor souls around the world who have lived under an umbrella of the US Constitution who will suffer immensely more and in deafening silence of globe dominating regime censorship. There will be no people to take up the cause, e.g., of the Uighurs if the US regime wants to make nice with the Chinese regime for whatever reason. There will be no reporting of atrocities or even knowledge of the lies that justified the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq and the killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis defending their hime against an evil invasion. There will be what the party wants … ney, demands you believe. Please see the book 1984 for reference. Many say they have read it, I seriously wonder if that is true.

rootusrootus 6y ago
> protect their community from infiltrators and subversives They see anybody who doesn't toe the Trump line as a brigader from r/politics. Everything is a conspiracy. But there are a number of very moderate conservatives that (for whatever reason) continue to call r/conservative their home, and they respond positively when something sane gets posted. I've had a couple great conversations over there with those folks. I just avoid the endless meme threads and other trashy pointless tribal gunk.

sixothree 6y ago

It's not irony. It's pervasive and it's dishonesty plain and simple.