3 ms·
Are you suggesting that not removing those posts is tacit agreement with their content rather than a principled stance on free speech for it's members? It could
by naasking 4y ago
Are you suggesting that not removing those posts is tacit agreement with their content rather than a principled stance on free speech for it's members? It could be both of course, but I always err on the side of charity even if you don't think they deserve it.
- CJefferson 4y agoIt is support -- kiwifarms isn't a free-for-all, they have their list of "lolcows" (people who have a thread dedicated to them), and only moderators can add new threads.
- naasking 4y agoSo only moderators can add new threads, and I assume users can post in threads, and I assume the users are the ones posting that the people should kill themselves. So how does this translate into the moderators or site operators/owners endorsing the content of user posts? Edit: to be clear, "allowing content" does not entail "endorsing content" per my original reply.