4 ms·

> a forum of people for quite some time organizing online hate and harrassment which has lead to swattings, and at least one death. Can anyone dispute those acc

> a forum of people for quite some time organizing online hate and harrassment which has lead to swattings, and at least one death. Can anyone dispute those accusations? Could you not also say this of Facebook, Whatsapp, YouTube and more?

threeseed 4y ago
> Could you not also say this of Facebook, Whatsapp, YouTube and more? No. Because whilst those companies are slower to respond (due to the volume of content their users generate) they are quite active at removing hateful and harassing content.
- yaddaor 4y ago
  Plus they are more like a general mirror of society where obviously there are bad actors and dark corners but not pretty much exclusively.
- yanderekko 4y ago
  >Because whilst those companies are slower to respond (due to the volume of content their users generate) they are quite active at removing hateful and harassing content. This is goalpost-shifting. Kiwifarms does moderate threats and such. It does not moderate mere "hateful and harassing content" (whatever that means, I assume a lot of "harassing" content does overlap with illegality), but if the clear no-no actions are swatting and such then clearly KF actively tries to prevent that. I fear that the implicit argument here is that in order for these efforts to be treated as "good faith", then forum owners need to not only remove clear legal threats but all sorts of speech (particularly "hate speech") that can be stochastically linked with the generation of those threats. That having sufficient moderation entails that moderators address not only actual threats but in removing a wide range of speech.
UncleMeat 4y ago
These companies are widely criticized for enabling harassment, hate, and violence. But these aren't the primary content on these websites. Forums largely dedicated to hating women and trans people are in a meaningfully different category.
- DuskStar 4y ago
  Ah, so now the goalposts have shifted to "the primary content is something I find objectionable". Why not just take down every site with that kind of content, if the "deaths linked to the site" isn't actually why you want to ban it?

threeseed 4y ago

> Could you not also say this of Facebook, Whatsapp, YouTube and more? No. Because whilst those companies are slower to respond (due to the volume of content their users generate) they are quite active at removing hateful and harassing content.

yaddaor 4y ago
Plus they are more like a general mirror of society where obviously there are bad actors and dark corners but not pretty much exclusively.
yanderekko 4y ago
>Because whilst those companies are slower to respond (due to the volume of content their users generate) they are quite active at removing hateful and harassing content. This is goalpost-shifting. Kiwifarms does moderate threats and such. It does not moderate mere "hateful and harassing content" (whatever that means, I assume a lot of "harassing" content does overlap with illegality), but if the clear no-no actions are swatting and such then clearly KF actively tries to prevent that. I fear that the implicit argument here is that in order for these efforts to be treated as "good faith", then forum owners need to not only remove clear legal threats but all sorts of speech (particularly "hate speech") that can be stochastically linked with the generation of those threats. That having sufficient moderation entails that moderators address not only actual threats but in removing a wide range of speech.

UncleMeat 4y ago

These companies are widely criticized for enabling harassment, hate, and violence. But these aren't the primary content on these websites. Forums largely dedicated to hating women and trans people are in a meaningfully different category.

DuskStar 4y ago
Ah, so now the goalposts have shifted to "the primary content is something I find objectionable". Why not just take down every site with that kind of content, if the "deaths linked to the site" isn't actually why you want to ban it?