Social Describe your ideal "Free Speech" Platform

[Mcountry]

I think you've already decided what quality discussion is, that is why you are on Sherdog posting every day instead of a completely unmoderated site.

Are you on Gab?

Honestly don't know about gab. I don't post on reddit because the layout is confusing. I don't do twitter because it's a cesspool. I do hockey boards. hfboards. But it is soooo ridiculously moderated that you can't complete a thought without triggering anyone.

I like MMA, and these boards seem to allow you at least the moderate ability to have opposing views.

 

[all caps]

How would you filter it out? Or would you?

I would put someone on ignore before I beg for someone to be banned. That will only hurt me in the end.

 

[Higus]

I would put someone on ignore before I beg for someone to be banned. That will only hurt me in the end.

So your ideal platform would have an option to ignore people?

 

[Mcountry]

How would you filter it out? Or would you?

I'm not sure. I'd have to give it some thought.

 

[all caps]

So your ideal platform would have an option to ignore people?

Sherdog without the weaponized mod hitmen

 

[Higus]

Sherdog without the weaponized mod hitmen

Would you even have mods?

 

[all caps]

Would you even have mods?

Good question. I gotta think about that one.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

For me there's no real ISSUE with what YouTube is doing it just feels like they're only going after one side of the aisle. Demonitizing guys like Military Arms Channel and .22Plinkster... the former who just does honest firearm reviews and also reviews old school WWI and WWII era firearms for fun and the latter who does some review but also does a ton of .22 rifle trickshots I don't get. All they did is review products and shit, neither are advocating for the destruction of anything.

MEANWHILE, you have a channel with a shitheel that denies a genocide took place still monetized baffles me. They just need to be more even handed in their approach.... which I doubt will occur cause there's no one to whack them on the nose with the newspaper when they done fuck up.

I don't know who this genocide denier is, but I'd be willing to bet he's on the same "side of the aisle" as the gun enthusiasts.

Never known of a Holocaust denier that was all for gun control. Unless you're talking about some other genocide.

 

[nac386]

Honestly don't know about gab. I don't post on reddit because the layout is confusing. I don't do twitter because it's a cesspool. I do hockey boards. hfboards. But it is soooo ridiculously moderated that you can't complete a thought without triggering anyone.

I like MMA, and these boards seem to allow you at least the moderate ability to have opposing views.

My opinion is that all discussion boards should choose their level of moderation, and then each person can choose the platform they prefer based on their own opinion of what creates the highest quality of discussion. There should be moderated sites and unmoderated sites, and of course you are always free to actually go speak to people in real life.

This board has very loose moderation, in my opinion, and I like it that way. People have to go way overboard in breaking the rules to get any infraction. But I've noticed that when you go towards no moderation, it turns into a bunch of moron outcasts who just want to be edgy. In my opinion, those people do not say interesting things.

My opinion is that nobody has ever been banned from this forum who had something unique to add. In every single case, there were people still here who held the same exact views and could communicate them without breaking all the forum rules repeatedly. It really does take repeated, intentional rule breaking to be banned.

But if you want to hear from them, go to Gab. You'll hear from them. But I bet you won't stay long because you'll realize you were not missing anything at all from their absence. Even the people who pretend to advocate for less censorship here have to admit that they intentionally avoid sites with less censorship. It's time to stop pretending that's what we want, it's clearly not.

 

[Gregolian]

I don't know who this genocide denier is, but I'd be willing to bet he's on the same "side of the aisle" as the gun enthusiasts.

Never known of a Holocaust denier that was all for gun control. Unless you're talking about some other genocide.

Cenk Unger

Dude denies the Armenian Genocide happened.

See what assuming gets you Possum?

 

[MicroBrew]

Say anything you want. Only content not allowed would be direct threats and urging others and government to harm people / property.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

I prefer no rules other than those that break the LAW. Like Calls for violence, libel.

Your feelings can fuck off.
If you are too stupid to know what you want or dont want to see and need someone to filter for you, fuck off.
If you are too stupid to stop reading things you dont want to read, fuck off.
If you believe that hate speech is real, fuck off.

Freedom of speech is clearly defined by law and internet companies have been benefiting from having the protections of "neutral platform" from the communications act since they went into law.

You cannot sue a website for its content. They are not liable. This is why the convington boy is not suing Twitter, but those that smeared him with their tweets. Its why he is suing the news media for repeatedly showing the clip of him smiling and not Facebook for having it on their site. They are protected by law. But the more they filter types of content, the more they are showing they are not acting as neutral platforms. This was already covered and proven in another thread yesterday...we actually dont need a new freespeech platform, we need lawmakers to enforce the law and watch all social media platforms scramble madly to stop their current Nazi tactics because not one of them want to lose that platform protection or they will become liable for all of the content on their site.

 

[dissectingaorticaneurysm]

 

[tonni]

Sherdog

 

[Blood and Thunder]

I think everybody knows that deep down. That is why everybody, even those who pretend to want zero censorship, join and are daily visitors to moderated sites instead of Gab. If you are not on Gab, posting every day, you should ask yourself why not? The answer is pretty obvious, I think.

The right just doesn't want the left to be in control of moderated sites. Also some sites have different communities so there's no harm posting on many of them. It's not like you're going to get the same group of people everywhere.

I did. My comment was not about being saved from bad ideas, my comment was about challenging and "mocking" bad ideas. You are welcome to your ideas, you are not entitled to not be mocked. The mocking is part of free speech.

The left is easily and endlessly mocked but they complain and try to get people banned for it. It's called "trolling" if a liberal mod is having a bad day and enough liberals gang up and report.

They can try to dish it out but can't take it.

 

[Blood and Thunder]

YOU are correct. IF this place had no moderation it would be nude and/or disgusting photo crazy around her. Plus throw it the overt racist and homophobic posts.
It would be chaos and honestly only the incels and gimmicks would be left posting on here.
Social media sites unfortunately have to regulate or you get a bunch of fake stuff and disgusting content, that will drive off your posters. Less posters equal less revenue.
The people that are like Derp Free speech when it comes to businesses that run these sites are living in a fantasy world.

I look at youtube and social media as being a public space. When you're out in a crowded area you don't start saying nasty things and running around naked. So the same common courtesy rules that have been in place for a while now should also apply for these unique sites.

 

[JamesRussler]

Simple. All content is allowed consistent with the First Amendment. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.

 

[JamesRussler]

I think you've already decided what quality discussion is, that is why you are on Sherdog posting every day instead of a completely unmoderated site.

Are you on Gab?

Yeah. Gab is cool. I enjoy it. Sherdog is cool too. It’s a unique community of people who are presumably interested in MMA, predominantly male, and perhaps a bit more athletic than users of other forums (I also noticed a lot of people like punk rock here). But that has nothing to do with its moderators. Mods here are better than some sites, but more often than not they inhibit thoughtful discussion by shutting down ideas they disagree with.

 

[Higus]

Simple. All content is allowed consistent with the First Amendment. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.

How would you fund the site's operation?
How would feeds operate?
How do you handle violators?

 

[Davem10]

Subscription based