Hi Phuks, how's everyone doing? I'm curious about so called "free speech" platforms, and why some thrive and others fail. Why are some toxic and others are wholesome? I'm not sure about Phuks' stance on free speech, but Lemmy and Raddle are pretty safe. If Phuks does support free speech to the whole extent, how come it seems less toxic than other alternatives?
It is kind of an unfortunate issue. In general, someone who makes high quality posts on a site or creates some form of content is not really going to be drawn to somewhere that advertises itself as a haven for free speech, because they have no need of it (until some of their shit is unfairly removed).
Really I feel as if the only solution to the problem is to not try to create free speech platforms, but create enough spaces on the internet where discussion is not policed by giant entities like facebook, google etc. That is the real problem.
It is kind of an unfortunate issue. In general, someone who makes high quality posts on a site or creates some form of content is not really going to be drawn to somewhere that advertises itself as a haven for free speech, because they have no need of it (until some of their shit is unfairly removed).
Really I feel as if the only solution to the problem is to not try to create free speech platforms, but create enough spaces on the internet where discussion is not policed by giant entities like facebook, google etc. That is the real problem.
As someone that's on the spectrum, please refrain from saying "autistic", it's very ableist. Thank you. Also, not every autistic shouts racial slurs.
As someone that's on the spectrum, please refrain from saying "autistic", it's very ableist. Thank you. Also, not every autistic shouts racial slurs.
This ridiculous over-sensitivity is entirely consistent with you having spent time on Raddle. Many users on here have a historical exposure to Voat.
Perhaps you should focus more on whether a person's message is meaningful/worthwhile, rather than nit-picking words that someone has trained you to be offended by?
This ridiculous over-sensitivity is entirely consistent with you having spent time on Raddle. Many users on here have a historical exposure to Voat.
Perhaps you should focus more on whether a person's message is meaningful/worthwhile, rather than nit-picking words that someone has trained you to be offended by?
I'm familiar with Voat, and me personally, I can't be around toxic language. I cringe inside if I see it or hear it.
I'm familiar with Voat, and me personally, I can't be around toxic language. I cringe inside if I see it or hear it.
As someone that's on the spectrum, please refrain from saying "autistic", it's very ableist.
As someone also on the spectrum, that's retarded. No matter what you call it, uncomfortably weird people are going to exist and normal people will always have some euphemism to describe it. No point playing linguistic whack-a-mole.
Also, not every autistic shouts racial slurs.
No, but shouting racial slurs outside of /pol/ is socially tone-deaf, and every autistic is, by definition, socially tone-deaf.
> As someone that's on the spectrum, please refrain from saying "autistic", it's very ableist.
As someone also on the spectrum, that's retarded. No matter what you call it, uncomfortably weird people are going to exist and normal people will always have some euphemism to describe it. No point playing linguistic whack-a-mole.
> Also, not every autistic shouts racial slurs.
No, but shouting racial slurs outside of /pol/ is socially tone-deaf, and every autistic is, by definition, socially tone-deaf.
So the inherent failure of a lot of platforms that declare themselves "free speech" is not because of free speech itself but because declaring yourself a free speech platform is a signal to shitty users that "they can't be banned" so often they do not respect the platform or other users driving communities high in autistic ranting and uncivil behavior.
Essentially taking the absolutist approach cuts off platforms' ability to kick out shitty high drama users that damage the platforms themselves. Conversely taking the opposite authoritarian approach ruins platforms as well.
I would say that Phuks is a "speech tolerant" platform, you can express pretty much any idea as long as you're smart enough to not be full blown autistic shouting racial slurs that will get Phuks kicked off the host.
I would say that actively policing speech is detrimental to a free and intellectually rich community but instead taking more of a hands off approach while reserving the right to take action against users who don't respect the platform is the right balance.
It also helps that most everyone here have been on some high drama platforms such as Reddit or Voat and generally when faced with high drama users we generally roll our eyes and ignore them, drama seekers starve here.