3 ms·
Banning people is an upside. Setting boundaries of acceptable behaviour is necessary for having a space where people won't be troll-brigaded and hate-swarmed, a
by JulianMorrison 5y ago
Banning people is an upside. Setting boundaries of acceptable behaviour is necessary for having a space where people won't be troll-brigaded and hate-swarmed, and where the worst people on the internet don't drive out everyone else.
- marstall 5y agoexactly. when I see "censorship-resistant," I hear "we don't have a way to control abuse on this platform."
- JulianMorrison 5y agoOr "this platform was explicitly designed to host abusers".
- gaws 5y agoWhen I see "censorship-resistant," I read "I can call someone the n-word and not get banned for it."
- Ambolia 5y agoThat's fine, nobody is taking Facebook and Twitter away if you enjoy those, just opening up new spaces.
- noptd 5y agoSeems like an acceptable position to take until you find yourself outside of the boundaries of acceptable behavior. Personally, I don't mind having to manually filter/ignore non-conformant behavior in order to prevent that possibility for myself and any other minority group online.
- Ambolia 5y agoCustomized chains of trusts can be created too. Where you could choose either directly who you want to read, or who you trust to "whitelist" people, so you can have censorship but you can choose your own censors.