4 ms·

My understanding was that the “first wave”, so to speak, of Gab users were the hardcore folks who genuinely had extremist views. Free Speech and censorship res

My understanding was that the “first wave”, so to speak, of Gab users were the hardcore folks who genuinely had extremist views. Free Speech and censorship resistant platforms tend to attract users in waves. The first wave is the most extreme, as those users get kicked off mainstream platforms first. Then subsequent waves of users join as less extreme views become problematic. While those waves are less radical, they still have to contend with being in the same pool as the others. Ordinary folks join for idealistic reasons and then see a bunch of radical content. I’m sure that puts a ton of people off. Parler, it seems, wants to be free speech but not that free speech, if you get what I’m saying.

ardy42 6y ago
> My understanding was that the “first wave”, so to speak, of Gab users were the hardcore folks who genuinely had extremist views. > Free Speech and censorship resistant platforms tend to attract users in waves. The first wave is the most extreme, as those users get kicked off mainstream platforms first. Then subsequent waves... I don't think that's true of social networks. Take Gab for instance: its "first wave" has solidly given it a reputation as a place for extreme racists, which repels everyone else (except maybe a handful of civil libertarians with questionable judgement). That reputation prevents "subsequent waves" of more moderate folks, who would rather go to a different platform. Also Gab, Parler, et al are really reactions against moderation, not censorship. However, most users actually welcome some level of moderation.