"Antiwoke" magazin on kbin.social posting bullshit like "how to end Wokeness" and "Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society" How to report ? he is the moderator of that magazin.

@ernest how do I report a Magazin on kbin.social ? There is a usere called "ps" who is posting to his own "antiwoke" Magazin on kbin.social. Please remove this and dont give them a chance to etablish them self on kbin.social. When I report his stuff it will go to him because he is the moderator of the magazin? Seems like a problem. Screenshot of the "antiwoke" Magazin /sub on kbin.social. 4 Headlines are visible, 2 exampels: "Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society" "How to end wokeness" .social 📎

edit: dont feed the troll, im shure ernest will delet them all when he sees this. report and move on.

Edit 2 : Ernest responded:
"I just need a little more time. There will likely be a technical break announced tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Along with the migration to new servers, we will be introducing new moderation tools that I am currently working on and testing (I had it planned for a bit later in my roadmap). Then, I will address your reports and handle them very seriously. I try my best to delete sensitive content, but with the current workload and ongoing relocation, it takes a lot of time. I am being extra cautious now. The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly. For now, please make use of the option to block the magazine/author."

❤

10A,

Welcome to the real world, where people disagree with you, and sometimes they're right and you're wrong. You can learn from everyone's perspective.

Is kbin meant to be a far-leftist echo chamber?

Noki,
@Noki@kbin.social avatar

its a far right talking point, do you want extremist on kbin.social?

Edit: Funny, your the guy agreeing with "ps".

"No normal person who obeys the laws of sexual morality calls himself a "cis". It's a slur used by those who hate being called something they don't call themselves (their God-given gender), but have too much cognitive dissonance and too much hatred for normal people to let that stop them. We need to reopen the asylums yesterday" - this you ?

more hatefull stuff from you "We may not all have been Christian back then, but almost all of us were, and everyone supported Judeo-Christian values without question. Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable."

deelightful,
@deelightful@kbin.social avatar

Unfortunately I don't know how to report magazines/users so I can't help you there but I just want to add my support to what you're asking because this sort of thing is against the kbin terms of service:

We expect all users to treat each other with respect and kindness. Harassment, hate speech, or any other form of harmful behavior will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to remove any content or user that violates these guidelines.

10A,

The communist far-left calls all disagreement "hate speech". It is not hateful to speak the truth.

jalda,
@jalda@kbin.social avatar

You are longing for the times when "Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp". Isn't this hateful?

10A,

It would be if that's what I said, but I never said I was longing for anything, and I never threatened to harm anyone.

Bipta,

You keep to coded language. Congratulations. Don't think we can't read it.

10A,

No, actually I say what I mean. You might try taking the context of the entire comment into account. It was about the purpose of freedom.

ElleChaise,

The tolerance of intolerance leads to the loss of all freedom. You'd have to be either a fraud or a fool to try and sell the opposite as truth. So which are you?

10A,

If you are intolerant of intolerance, then you are intolerant. Full stop. If those are my only two available options, I must be a fool.

jalda,
@jalda@kbin.social avatar

Whatever, I copied your whole paragraph in another comment, and the context is pretty clear for anyone who cares to read it. I didn't claim that you personally were threatening to do the beating, only that you thought that the beating was desiderable for the "program of western civilization". If you really don't want homosexual people to be beaten to a pulp, then you should seriously reconsider how you express your ideas.

10A,

Even taking that paragraph out of context is misleading. The whole comment was about the purpose of freedom.

jalda,
@jalda@kbin.social avatar

You still haven't addressed my point. Do you think it is desiderable that homosexual people are beaten to a pulp? Is a YES/NO question, it shouldn't be difficult to answer.

10A,

No, I do not advocate for violence (except in self-defense situations where there's no other option).

ThunderingJerboa,
@ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social avatar 
It made sense back when everyone was, more or less, on board with the program of western civilization. We may not all have been Christian back then, but almost all of us were, and everyone supported Judeo-Christian values without question. Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable.

At this point we need to ask ourselves what the purpose of freedom is. Are we a free people so we can exercise perverted pleasures of the flesh, the slaughter of innocent babies, and genital mutilation of children without their parents knowledge? If you answer "yes", you just might be repeating the whisper of a demon.

The purpose of our freedom is to worship God as we see fit, and to do His will. In the past we never needed to spell that out, because it went without saying. Different people have different views and belief systems, and they're all valid provided they all worship God.

As secular society grows, we lose the underlying reason for our freedom. Freedom is still a valid concept for anyone who knows how to use it correctly, and who understands that the ultimate freedom is the freedom from sin, which is achieved by accepting Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior.

But for those who think the purpose of freedom is to follow Satan, to abuse themselves and others, to commit endless sins, and then, most evil of all, to celebrate pride in their sin (as if they don't even understand that pride itself is a sin), no, I no longer agree that people are entitled to live their lives in the way that they want. They're entitled to repent, and once they do that we can discuss freedom.

Here is your exact quote, there is no "misrepresentation" here. You are firstly suggesting that the gays are worshiping (indirectly or directly) Satan and have no right to "freedom" because your fictionally sky daddy said so. Lets take a step backwards, so you are suggesting your all loving god, basically has doomed 3/5s (if not more until the white people came) of the world because he decided to only care about Europe and part of the middle east for hundreds to thousands of years because this all knowing being somehow couldn't have stable and growing amount of worshipers in Asia, the Americas, Australia, the pacific, etc dooming them all to hell (or purgatory depending on your denomination) because they as you say can't be able to accept "Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior."

You yearn for a day when everyone (in your neighborhood) had your stupid sky daddy's beliefs and if they didn't you wouldn't pull the trigger or what not but you aren't opposed because now we live in a world of sin and whatnot and you want them to repent because they decide to have their freedom that is instill upon them because they are born a fucking human not because a fucking fictional sky daddy said you have it.

It god damn hilarious you are also reiterating god damn fanfic, the cardinal 7 sins weren't a major concept until they were first enumerated by Pope Gregory I in the 6th century and further expanded upon by St. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century. Then to top it all off, we as a modern society mostly know the configuration of hell by a god damn self insert fanfic by Dante Alighieri in "Divine Comedy" or to be more specific Dante's Inferno.

Also seems you aren't very godly if you aren't even following Jesus' own words

“You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:39),

Your love seems very conditional on the concept that they have to worship your god before they deserve any love. Its honestly disgusting and you are the posterchild of why people hate religious nuts. People can worship what they want if they aren't hurting people but holy shit the shit you are willfully allowing by decree people deserve no freedom if they don't have Judeo-Christians.

Bizarroland,
@Bizarroland@kbin.social avatar

That's called masturpraying.

You're not hurting anyone (in the physical sense) but you're getting off on the idea that bad things should happen to other people, people you consider to not be in your "in group", and this is usually done in the name of and for the glory of God.

It's a fancy sin that preachers don't tell people about because they're usually guilty of it themselves.

Masturpraying is direct service to and worship of Satan, and he really enjoys it because the people who do it do it in God's name as they commit spiritual violence against the kingdom of God and its occupants while thinking that they are doing good.

10A,

Okay except no, I wasn't doing that whatsoever.

GunnarRunnar,

Fuck off or grow up.

RadicalHomosapien,

There is no disagreement when it comes to gender identity. You don't get to disagree with how someone lives their life when it doesn't effect you. It is not a "communist" ideology to support trans folks and you're exposing how little you actually understand about politics with these types of assertions.

10A,

It's off-topic to debate that here, so I'll refrain. But suppose you're right, and I understand nothing. And suppose the antiwoke mod knows nothing either. Would that be suitable grounds to ban a magazine and/or ban us as users?

GizmoLion,
@GizmoLion@kbin.social avatar

Well that depends, you've been pretty thoroughly educated in this post, so now what will you do about it? I fully expect you'll return to your far right anti-woke hatemongering, in which case yes you should be blocked.

Or you can retract it, and maybe there's hope for you yet.

Naich,
@Naich@kbin.social avatar

If you genuinely can't see that it's hate speech, then you need to be blocked and not debated because you are immune to reasoning.

10A,

Amusing. If I can't accept your obviously incorrect position, then you must shut down conversation because I'm immune to reasoning? Take a look in the mirror.

Naich,
@Naich@kbin.social avatar

This is not a conversation. Nothing of value will be lost by shutting it down.

bane_killgrind,

"We need to reopen the asylums yesterday" isn't the truth, it's your opinion.

In my opinion, words like this are propaganda intended for radicalisation, and dehumanize people that don't fit into rigid definitions of acceptable lifestyle. Your opinion states that these people should be deprived of liberty and free movement, and deprived of autonomy over their own bodies.

In my opinion, I don't need to tolerate you in my social circles, and Ernest doesn't need to use his own computing resources to enable your shit take on what freedom is.

Kindly go and have your "free speech" using resources that come out of your own pocket, not an unwilling person's.

10A,

I respect most of what you wrote. Yes, that one sentence you quoted at the top is nothing more than my opinion. Yes, you could consider it propaganda. But I didn't intend it to be for radicalization, and I wouldn't hope that to be its effect.

I don't mean to dehumanize anyone, no matter what. But I do agree that I have advocated for a somewhat rigid definition of acceptable lifestyle.

With regard to depriving anyone of liberty, free movement, and autonomy, that's specifically for those who need mental help. For many years we used asylums to contain such people. Many of our current social ills began when we closed the asylums down, and changed the DSM to redefine conditions formerly considered types of insanity to now be considered perfectly healthy. This too is just my opinion, but I'm trying to clarify that it only addresses people who need mental help.

You most certainly don't need to tolerate me in your social circles, and I won't be offended if you choose to block me.

Ernest doesn't need to do anything at all, and I think we can all agree we're grateful for what he's done. Personally I hope he establishes a free speech policy, but in any case we'll see what happens.

With regard to money, I've bought Ernest coffee and I hope you have too! That doesn't entitle me to anything, of course. But it's just to say that yes, I have contributed.

Aesthesiaphilia,

and changed the DSM

Side note, that's more an indictment of the DSM and the rigor of psychology than anything else. Whether something is a disorder or not depends on how popular it is, the whole thing reeks of quackery

10A,

Woke is far-leftist neo-Marxism. What you call "far right" and "extremist" is actually normal, conservative, and Christian. What you call "hateful" is actually just truth telling.

Downvote me all you want, but you sound like naive child who hasn't learned how to engage with competing worldviews.

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

I think the people downvoting you know exactly how to engage hate.

10A,

Hatred is not speech you disagree with. It's not speech that hurts your delicate feelings. It's not speech that contradicts your values. It's none of that.

I'm fine with downvotes, although I miss old-school reddiquette back when we upvoted content that should be seen, regardless of whether or not we agreed with it. But this discussion is about banning people and magazines, not downvotes.

Bipta,

Hatred is not speech you disagree with. It's not speech that hurts your delicate feelings. It's not speech that contradicts your values. It's none of that.

Right. It's speech that tells people they're not worthy of or welcome to exist.

Thanks for playing.

10A,

That's not exactly what hate speech is, but it's also not what I said. Standing up for conservative Christian behavior is wholly different from telling anyone they're not worthy or welcome to exist. We are all made in God's image, all of us able to repent, be forgiven, and live according to God's will.

effingjoe,
@effingjoe@kbin.social avatar

Which god? Zeus?

Cyzaine,
@Cyzaine@kbin.social avatar

Zeus!??! Blasphemy. All father or no father I say. Odin for best God.

GizmoLion,
@GizmoLion@kbin.social avatar

Your sky daddy is fake, and I, for one, will not live under your people's delusions of truth.

Ski,

What if they don't believe in the Christian God because the Christian God is demonstrably not real?

HelixDab,

Mmmmm, it's more like no one can reasonably demonstrate the truth of any god, rather than any specific god being demonstrably false. It's an important distinction. You can't disprove a thing, but you can prove that alternate explanations are far more probable, or that the thing doesn't fit the evidence.

szczur,
@szczur@kbin.social avatar

So perhaps you should repent for actively hurting your fellow children of God. Because unless you're not a hardcore old-school christian, freedom of choice on how to live ones life if it doesn't hurt anybody is a God given right. And you actively want to take that away.

10A,

I absolutely do not want anyone's freedom of choice taken away. That's one of my core principles. God gives us free will so that we may choose. Without the ability to choose, we cannot be saved. So you are grossly misinterpreting me.

kestrel7,
@kestrel7@kbin.social avatar

No one needs to see this, you are throwing out extremely basic arguments that all of us encounter every day in this regressive society. You aren't speaking truth to power, you're just being part of the power right now. You aren't making yourself look good and you aren't making the world a better, freer, more nuanced, or happier place.

People: Hey, stop being a jackass.

Conservatives: OMG, yoU WANT TO CREATE A FAR LeFTIST ECHO CHAMBER

Every fucking time.

Infiltrated_ad8271,
@Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social avatar

OMG, yoU WANT TO CREATE A FAR LeFTIST ECHO CHAMBER

You do realize that this post is specifically about ideological censorship, right?

Aesthesiaphilia,

Hatred invites and deserves censorship.

AnonTwo,

Can you explain how a post that was aimed towards "trans lobby harms our society" is not hatred?

I mean I somewhat blame the OP for not linking the posts for some context, but after a bit of looking around it sounds like the posts in question are in fact hate speech and not just things to disagree with.

10A,

What if an article was titled "Christian lobby harms our society"? Would you consider that hateful? Personally, as a Christian, I certainly wouldn't upvote such an article, but I wouldn't try to get it banned either. People have viewpoints based on personal experiences, and some people find harm in some political lobbies. It's not hatred to speak what one believes to be true.

Froyn,

Jesus wore dresses, get over it.

Infiltrated_ad8271,
@Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social avatar

Since you read in context, could you tell me where the hate speech is?

I only see one article where they spend most of the time making a disclaimer in favor of trans rights, followed by a critique of non-diagnosis and surgery on children, or how nothing is allowed to be questioned. That last one we can see in this thread, people are foaming at the mouth over a title (which includes "extreme, btw...), it's crazy.

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

Do you remember when I called you an asshole?

I'd like to expand that you're a mi-sogynist , homophobe, and your support for fascists leaves me with no compunctions presuming you hold racist beliefs as well.

In short, I want to make clear this is not a case of what you may have read in Mathew 10:22. You are not being persecuted, and it is not "for righteousness' sake". You are a hate filled asshole who pursues policies which will harm society, and you seek to insert and establish the dominance of (what you believe to be) the word of your god while desiring safe space free from the calling out of your hate.

I also suspect you might be closeted.

That last line is not served as a "gotcha". I want you to know community and acceptance can exist outside what you seem to have found convening with some very dangerous ideology on the right. I suspect at some level you want to be lead away as as you say yourself there are places you could hang out that would not challenge your beliefs. You are here in a "den of sin".

I will commune with a few gods (not yhwh; different better gods) to see if they can bless you with the conviction to choose kindness over cantankerousness.
Change is possible.
You are not broken beyond repair.
I Love You.

I have faith in your ability to be a better person than you have thus-far demonstrated yourself to be.

10A,

Wow, this is such a well composed comment that I almost want to upvote it. Nice work with all of the links and research. You deserve a better reply than I have the energy to write, as I'm tired of this conversation. Sorry.

To address a few of your accusations:

  1. I am not racist. I'd like to remind you that the southern slaveholders were all Democrats, and the Republican party has always opposed slavery. To this day, Democrats are obsessed with skin color, in their CRT and BLM, while Republicans advocate for color-blind meritocracy. Let's not argue about politics here, please, but no, I am not a racist.
  2. I am not closeted. I do confess that I endure other sorts of evil temptations on occasion, though, just like any human being does, so I can certainly relate to those who suffer from SSA. But as a Christian, I pray that I may be shielded from such temptation when I encounter it, and prayer works.

And lastly, quickly, to address two other high-level points you made:

  1. I'm here because there are a large majority of non-Christians here, many of whom have no exposure to the word of God or anyone who praises it. I believe the Great Commission tells me to be here, if the community will accept me. I may get plenty of downvotes (seriously, look at my reputation score!), but if I can plant a seed in the fertile heart of even just one other person, the Holy Spirit will do His work.
  2. Despite your rejection of the one true living God, I truly appreciate your expression of love, however sarcastic it may have been (I can't tell). I am certainly not broken, though I was a broken, drugged out nihilist in my youth before I found Jesus. I love you too, @FfaerieOxide.
FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

You seem to be under the mistaken assumption I am interested in debating you.

I am not. Nor do I care to hear you loudly proselytizing as a certain other group of people do.

I invite you to consider why you get the reaction you universally seem to to your posts, and proffer that it is not because everyone is jealous that Jesus loves you more than them.
I am not however here to convert you, nor do I intend to platform fascist talking points by treating them as worthy or needing of debate.

I will leave you with the words of one of the prophets of my faith,

"You ain't a vampire; you don't have to suck."

jclinares,
@jclinares@kbin.social avatar

If you answer "yes", you just might be repeating the whisper of a demon."

So, wait... people who have a competing world view from yours are listening to demons? Now who's naive? xD

10A,

Demons absolutely do exist, and I'm happy to discuss that in a different context. It's pretty off-topic here, though.

pancakesyrupyum,

“Demons absolutely do exist” lol

10A,

The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn’t exist.

—Verbal Kint

pancakesyrupyum,

Haha hell yeah, hail Satan, am I right?

Animoscity,

Trust me, this guy told some people a thing and they wrote it down, and while no one has seen or has proof, its real.

bushOfBerries,

I think you mistyped truth social in your URL bar. This place will not welcome you, I think.

ElleChaise,

Who are ya gonna believe, me; or your own eyes?

geoffervescent,
@geoffervescent@kbin.social avatar

We are all happy to engage with competing worldviews

What you call "far right" and "extremist" is actually normal, conservative, and Christian. What you call "hateful" is actually just truth telling.

This isn't a competing worldview, or rather, it's a competing worldview in the same way that phrenology and alchemy are competing ways to view anatomy and chemistry. Like, it's possible to genuinely believe in these things if your conditions of childhood existence are so constrained, isolated, or manipulated that you are happier living life in your own personal 'Truman show.' But the rest of us don't have an obligation to play along with your fantasy.

Most of us here on the internet have at some point met someone we've had a reasonable political disagreement with but could walk away understanding each other better due to those disagreements. Most of us would even say thise diagreements have gone in both political directions. The same cannot honestly be said for folks with your version of a 'world view.' It's like a method actor but worse because it lacks any goal, it's like a person suffering mental but worse because the cause (Patriarchal models of religion) is external, intentional, and had been prosthlytizing delusion as a worldview for millenia.

AnonTwo,

You know, calling everyone not on your political compass "Not Normal" is kindof not coming off as mature as you think it is....

Basically rather than "disagree" with people, you're creating strawmen to debase anyone speaking to you, so you don't have to disagree with them.

10A,

I'm sorry. That sounds reasonable. I'm really trying to avoid political debate here, and just stand up for kbin allowing a diversity of perspectives. I understand how that might come across as you describe.

mrnotoriousman,

Woke is far-leftist neo-Marxism

Lmaoooo with the buzzwords. Define far-left neo marxism and give some examples of it being promoted by US politicians.

10A,

I'd be happy to do that, but not in the context of this thread. If m/antiwoke survives, maybe we can have a mutually respectful disagreement about it there in a few days.

jalda,
@jalda@kbin.social avatar

I don't usually go to through other people's comment history, but this one is a goldmine

"It made sense back when everyone was, more or less, on board with the program of western civilization. We may not all have been Christian back then, but almost all of us were, and everyone supported Judeo-Christian values without question. Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable. At this point we need to ask ourselves what the purpose of freedom is. Are we a free people so we can exercise perverted pleasures of the flesh, the slaughter of innocent babies, and genital mutilation of children without their parents knowledge? If you answer "yes", you just might be repeating the whisper of a demon."

"woke neo-marxism claims that any normal person is bad. That means its practitioners openly discriminate against conservative white Christian men, especially if they practice heterosexual behavior in a traditional marriage."

"Ironically, secession is about the most American thing we could do at this point"

Noki,
@Noki@kbin.social avatar

keep digging, your doing "gods work" ;)

strange to see someone as crazy as 10A on kbin.social, feels more like a Fox-Viewer who chose the wrong server.

10A,

So happens I'm the moderator of m/FoxNews so, in a way, you're right!

minnieo,
@minnieo@kbin.social avatar

mod of the foxnews mag lmfao. oh man, it keeps getting better and better

Osa-Eris-Xero512,

Guess it was only a matter of time before the Nazis colonized here with the server being open sign-up

10A,

You have clearly never been to m/FoxNews.

10A,

Click on the link to the magazine. I promise you you'll be happy you did.

minnieo,
@minnieo@kbin.social avatar

i'm not in the mood for comedy so i'll pass, but thanks C:

10A,

I mean, it's literally news about foxes.

GizmoLion,
@GizmoLion@kbin.social avatar

His name's 10A... he may well be as sovcit too. Par for the course.

mmmplak,
@mmmplak@kbin.social avatar

I mean who can argue with that. Things got weirder on the second page of this thread. I just can’t take this seriously.

VerifiablyMrWonka,
@VerifiablyMrWonka@kbin.social avatar

Thank you for doing the investigation so I don't have to. He'll be going on many peoples block lists at this point.

Bipta,

You present the false choice between hateful extremists and left wing extremists.

10A,

I agree that would be a false dichotomy. I disagree that I presented that choice. But I appreciate that you're actually engaging with ideas here.

IncognitoErgoSum,

I don't want kbin to be a far-leftist echo chamber. I also don't want kbin to be a far-right echo chamber. I think it's perfectly reasonable to want to protect a community from extreme and hateful views, regardless of which side they come from, because those views tend to attract the type of horrible, toxic people such as yourself who advocate beating the shit out of people for being different in a harmless way.

Welcome to the real world, where people who are different from you exist and mind their own business. If you can't put up with people who don't affect you in any way, I don't think the rest of us owe it to you to put up with you, either. Go find a cesspit to wallow in.

10A,

I upvoted you because your response was based on a misunderstanding of me. I never advocating for harming anyone, and I would never do that.

IncognitoErgoSum,

Oh, and about sexual morality, here's how that works:

If it doesn't involve children, animals, the deceased, or non-consenting people, it's none of your business. Persecuting people who have done nothing to you is immoral.

10A,

Your notion of how that works is not rooted in the Bible.

IncognitoErgoSum,

Matthew 7:5 -You hypocrite! First, remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye.

Maybe worry about yourself first, guy who pines for the "good old days" when gay people used to get the shit beat out of them. Nobody corrupts the God's word like loud, intolerant far-right Christians.

10A,

Do you know how many times in this thread I've explained that I never expressed a desire for harm to come to anyone? And each time I'm just downvoted and mocked with a "we know what you really mean" attitude. No, really, I don't pine for that. Some people just really love to hate on Christians.

matthieu_xyz,
@matthieu_xyz@piaille.fr avatar

@kbinMeta
@10A
Considering the issue about tankies on some lemmy instances, I think we understand how much left is too far left. And what you describe as "woke" isn’t it.

10A,

I concede that's a very good point. The term "far-left" (just like "far-right") is problematic because there's such a wide spectrum. In the center-left, you have old-school leftists like Bill Maher. On the far left you have tankies. In between them you have the woke. So what do we call that? I can't pretend to answer the question, but I recognize that you have a very good point. Personally I'll continue calling woke far-left until I learn a more appropriate term.

Aesthesiaphilia,

As a member of that group, we prefer to call ourselves "progressives".

10A,

Fair, but so does the center-left.

FfaerieOxide,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

When I report his stuff it will go to him because he is the moderator of the magazin[e]?

When someone reported one of my posts (they thought it was spam) in my magazine I got a notification in my magazine panel, yes. No alert telling me there was a notification, but a notification.

Am unsure if admin likewise get a ping but almost certain they would be too busy to notice if they did.

HubertManne,
@HubertManne@kbin.social avatar

I mean I don't know or even care to censur on that level but thanks for the heads up so I can block. Im thinking it would be nice to have a recommened block magazine

szczur,
@szczur@kbin.social avatar

It's not censorship, it's self-defence.

HubertManne,
@HubertManne@kbin.social avatar

can you be more specific. I can't find what you found.

static,
@static@kbin.social avatar

A single shitposter, with only downvoted posts. without attention they would have stopped posting, but now it has attention.

While the content is stupid and vile, is he breaking any rules?

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

Streisand effect for sure. There seems to be run of these types of posts in the fediverse lately. People don’t seem to realize that sometimes they’re better off letting these situations take their natural course (and die), and not intervene unless it grows beyond manageability.

10A,

Wisdom ^

mack123,

The rules of the internet remains unchanged, regardless of platform. Do not feed the trolls.

Dagnet,

You are replying to the troll yourself lol

mack123,

Sometimes the mobile U/I wins, but I decided to let it stand regardless of replying to the wrong comment. Maybe the troll learns something, though I doubt it.

kestrel7,
@kestrel7@kbin.social avatar

So you advocate your own posting taking its natural course and dying off? I can think of a way you can hurry up this process.

mcgravier,

Dude, he's mocking you all and you don't even get it. The more you scream the more attention you're bringning to his magazine.

You people are hopless.

00,
@00@kbin.social avatar

Dude, he's mocking you all and you don't even get it. The more you scream the more attention you're bringning to his magazine.

Other people are not as stupid as you think. But the question between not giving it attention to challenge it and possibly giving it food to fester or not giving it attention and also not challenging it is not easily answered. Looking at the repulsive backlash, drawing attention to it was the right choice. Sure, some more people might flock there, but the vast majority strongly disapproves and now knows that kbin.social (unsurprisingly) has awful people on it as well.

zedtronic,

#1 rule on the internet: don't feed the trolls. Downvote them, block them, move on. They're not here to engage in good faith.

10A,

As someone who genuinely does enjoy trolling on rare occasion, I think you misunderstand what a troll is. Speaking sincerely held ideas from across the political spectrum does not make someone a troll. A troll is insincere yet playful. That's not to say I shouldn't be blocked by anyone who wants to block me, but it's not for being a troll in this context.

blightbow,
@blightbow@kbin.social avatar

A troll is insincere yet playful.

I chuckled at least. A troll's motivation for the rise that they seek is largely inconsequential, as is the delivery mechanism. ;) Let's not go and disenfranchise the majority of the internet's trolling population with narrow typecasting!

While we're on the topic of trolling, are you familiar with Sealioning?

Sealioning (also sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("I'm just trying to have a debate"), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter. It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate", and has been likened to a denial-of-service attack targeted at human beings. The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcomic Wondermark by David Malki, which The Independent called "the most apt description of Twitter you'll ever see".

It's a rhetorical question, no need to respond. Someone else might learn something they didn't know before today. :)

smokinjoe,
@smokinjoe@kbin.social avatar

and not intervene unless it grows beyond manageability.

I'd rather nip it in the bud. You're just letting things fester.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

I don’t disagree with the sentiment, but it will become impossible to accomplish, practically speaking, as the fediverse grows. There’s only so much that can be done with volunteers, and it’s not like armies of paid staffers work much better (as we’ve seen the major tech corps try to do).

There is a sociological aspect to this, numerous studies have confirmed the effects of highlighting bad actors. There’s a copycat effect (as studies on mass shootings show) as well as what we call the Streisand effect. Both inadvertently encourage others to perpetuate the behaviour rather than serving to limit it.

icydefiance,

Allowing bad actors to advertise themselves is highlighting them. Banning them and deleting their communities is the opposite of highlighting them.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

Exactly. We agree? Thats what I said/mean. This post doesn’t ban them, it’s inadvertently advertising their content. There have been several post like this recently. While they may mean well they likely have the opposite effect.

smokinjoe,
@smokinjoe@kbin.social avatar

So your solution is to just give up and let hate fester? When has appeasement ever worked?

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

Not at all. I think you're conflating what I said with someone else. I’m only suggested we don’t inadvertently promote this content by creating a front-page post denouncing it.

The point about it being impossible to accomplish is about perfection. It’s a wack-a-mole game. Since this content and people will always be there until found, it’s better to not give them more of an audience.

No site will ever perfectly remove objectionable content. It’s one reason why the upvote downvote system is so valuable for a site like this.

wahming,

I think the problem is that at the moment, the system is new enough that there's no way to get this sort of content removed. Hence this front page post. It's not about calling attention to the magazine, it's about calling attention to the entire issue..

smokinjoe,
@smokinjoe@kbin.social avatar

You can't avoid hate and hope it recedes. You have to take it directly head on and stomp it out immediately.

If they decide to move elsewhere, then follow them there and continue rooting them out.

Just "letting people decide" is useless and will only enable them to continue.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

Agreed, I think you’re still conflating things I never said. Nothing was in the “let the people decide” vein.

Thats why I think it’s better to silently remove them rather then making posts saying “look at this bad guy right there”.

AnonTwo,

Where does this sentiment come from? Reddit for the most part already does this. Twitter before Elon showed up did this. Most modern sites already do this

The only place I can think of where this is commonplace is 4chan, because they don't moderate.

Yes, highlighting bad actors over a course of time can be problematic. But the point in this case is the point out that we don't have the tools to deal with said bad actor. The tools that other sites have. It's not being said in vain, the goal is to make aware that something needs to be done so that people don't even see the bad actor to bring attention to them.

There is a purpose to the current efforts. I think everyone understands that constantly bringing attention to them will do no good, but the goal here is to bring attention to tools that are needed, so that it doesn't happen again, or at the very least to this extent.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

You’d might be conflating my comment with someone else? I’m not against moderating. I just think it’s a bad idea to blast these communities or users onto the front page when they’re found.

No example has been able to squash out bad actors and unwanted content completely. That’s the impossible task I’m referring to. Neither volunteers, nor paid staff have accomplished this for any site. In all your example there are still areas flying under the radar.

As such, it’s better to not inadvertently fan the flames when you find the fire, don’t make their soapbox bigger. Instead put it out quietly so it doesn’t harm anyone else.

AnonTwo,

Examples are good when trying to point out a problem actually exists and not have certain people trying to tone it down and make it not seem like as big a problem as it is, despite even the devs acknowledging there's a problem.

The final point is more tools are being worked on, the thread did do something, so trying to argue a point that would basically have prevented it just seems...poor taste.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

Everything you’re talking is perception, friend. You chose to take my comment that way. The dev tools were being worked on long before this post.

As I said before, I’m not making this up, the phenomenon is studied and the effect is proven.

slicedcheesegremlin,
@slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social avatar

The biggest thing im afraid of happening to Kbin/the lemmyverse is that it will end up like Ruqqus, especially now that it seems to be swamped with trolls.

grahamsz,

I expect that instances will get more locked down, perhaps those of us on an instance can vouch for new users who might join, but I can't see how a volunteer admin could police a million user instance. I used to run a 10k user discussion site and while that wasn't a fulltime job it was still a giant pain in the ass at times. If we can get in a steady state where an instance has a core of active posters and lurkers then that seems better than infinite growth.

That then surely leads to federated instances that each represent the tolerances of their admin(s) and they presumably federate or not with other instances with similar sensibilities.

In the end the nazis will get their nazi instance and federate with likeminded types - they get defederated everywhere else and wont really be a problem (maybe for the FBI). (Though I'm not certain that all internet nazis truly are, i think there a group of trolls that get their kicks from being controversial and will get no joy by being surrounded by people who accept them)

The problems are going to be in the gray areas. For example, the argument that trans people don't deserve to exist... I find that abhorrent, but there are people who will happily say that on TV, and there are CEOs of $44B social networks that appear to agree. Some instances will tolerate that on the grounds of free speech and others will not, then the admins are left trying to decide what's grounds for defederation.

However in my limited experience, the thing that kills projects like this is too much navel gazing. There will always be some trolling and noise, but if the remaining users expend all their energy talking about it then the whole thing collapses in on itself. I feel like this is starting to happen on reddit where lots of subs are consumed by meta, but the best thing we can do here is get out and create active communities.

rastilin,

The problem is that by that point it will have grown beyond manageability. You know the "Nazi bar" saying.

There's a bunch of people (who are Nazis) and they seem cool, quiet, well spoken, just having a drink. And they bring their friends and those guys are cool too. Then those guys bring their friends and those guys are less cool and now normal people don't drink at the bar anymore and you look around and it's a Nazi bar and you can't make them leave or they'll start causing "problems". So. I'm all for just using the brutal hammer of censorship.

It's not a free speech platform and no one ever said it was.

genoxidedev1,

Hate speech is not part of free speech anyways. Fuck nazis. Everyone that gets offended by that can get fucked as well.

AshDene,
@AshDene@kbin.social avatar

It depends on your definition of free speech, the US constitution does consider it part of free speech.

The US constitution also considers free speech a right that protect a websites right not to repeat hate speech, not a users "right" to force a website to host their speech. In the constitutions view of the world free speech is protection against the government, not a tool to force other people to host your speech.

genoxidedev1,

I really do not care about your constitution. I'm from Germany not the US.

'"Germany places strict limits on speech and expression when it comes to right-wing extremism" or anything reminiscent of Nazism. Hate speech on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity also is banned in Germany.'

And I think this is the way all countries should handle it. No need to defend people promoting hate speech by debating me or your definition of free speach, I do not adhere by it.

Edit: I will wear 10A(ssholes') downvote as a badge of honor, thank you!

AshDene,
@AshDene@kbin.social avatar

I'm actually not from the US, I was just giving it as an example because it is the most famous one that unequivocally does include it.

What I'm really saying is "free speech" isn't really one thing. It means different things in different contexts. For instance the breadth of "free speech" you should allow in what you promise to repeat (that's what hosting something is) is much smaller than the breadth of "free speech" that you should not think less of someone for saying is in turn much smaller than the breadth of "free speech" that you should not wield the power of government to punish. And people legitimately disagree on where each of those boundaries lie.

I do think I missed the mark with the comment you replied to rereading it. I raised it because when someone says "It's not a free speech platform and no one ever said it was" they are using the american republican-troll's definition of free speech that means "anything but child porn", and I think your reply was misunderstanding their comment as a result. But I don't think I successfully conveyed my point.

Aesthesiaphilia,

Everything else aside, how you gonna say you don't care about the US Constitution and then bring up the German Constitution? No one cares about that one either.

backseat,

What is the relevance of the US constitution? This is not a US platform.

updawg,

It depends on your definition of free speech

It's one definition that is different than the definition that had been provided in the parent comment.

albinanigans,

Appending:

Free speech also doesn't mean "freedom from consequences." And sometimes those include getting your shit deleted from a website or dragged up and down social media.

rastilin,

Something else that occurred to me. If someone posted something that was pro-woke in /r/conservative or on Parler or any of those other apps, they'd get banned immediately. "Free Speech" only seems to be a concern when it's right-wingers posting on left-leaning forums, never the reverse.

I think that taking the free speech argument at face value in the present day just means you're gullible.

magnetosphere,
@magnetosphere@kbin.social avatar

I think hardcore conservatives simply don’t have an inherent sense of empathy. That’s why they don’t really care about the victims of a crime, disaster, etc. until it happens to them personally. They do not have the perspective to put themselves in another person’s shoes.

It’s NOT an intelligence issue. It’s easy to write people off as stupid, but that’s not the case. For them, being unable to think with empathy is as natural as being unable to see infrared light.

They’ve figured out that making themselves appear to be victims can sometimes make people listen, but they can’t fully explain why. That lack of understanding is why they don’t see the hypocrisy in banning people from their platforms, but then whining loudly when they’re treated the same way.

This is all just guesswork, but it’s the best explanation I’ve been able to come up with that doesn’t make my head explode.

genoxidedev1,

Cross out the "hardcore", lack of empathy is very much a core part of conservatism no matter which side of conservatism, social | fiscal, you lean into and by how much. If you're socially conservative you want every social aspect to stay as it is which proves inherently a lack of empathy. If you're fiscally conservative you want monetary value to stay as is (in terms of inflation and cost-cutting etc.) no matter whom it hurts (as long as it doesn't hurt you, of course).

Which is why I personally think it actually is (also) an intelligence issue, because the people that are not socially conservative and only fiscally conservative usually vote for the party of big government and military spending (R) which goes against anything fiscally conservative and as a "cool" side effect also proves to be detrimental to social values of different people and groups.

You probably know the quote by George Carlin, as its a told tale as old as day. I think the quote nicely illustrates the voting game in the US.

AshDene,
@AshDene@kbin.social avatar

With the very rare exception, absolutely.

h34d,

Reminds me of a quote by Nazi minister of propaganda Joseph Goebbels from 1935, after the Nazis took power:

“Wenn unsere Gegner sagen: Ja, wir haben Euch doch früher die […] Freiheit der Meinung zugebilligt – –, ja, Ihr uns, das ist doch kein Beweis, daß wir das Euch auch tuen sollen! […] Daß Ihr das uns gegeben habt, – das ist ja ein Beweis dafür, wie dumm Ihr seid!”

– source

Rough translation:

“When our enemies say: But we’ve granted you […] freedom of opinion back in the day – –, well, yes, you granted it to us, but that is no proof that we should do likewise! […] The fact that you granted it to us, – that is only proof for how stupid you are!”

For fascists at least talking about freedom of speech and the like is just another tool they try to wield in their quest to gain power, nothing else.

10A,

I'm no Nazi, but I get your point. What you don't realize is once the bar kicks the Nazis out, they start their own bar, and there their numbers grow. A more intelligent approach is to rationally talk with them, as Daryl Davis has with KKK members.

effingjoe,
@effingjoe@kbin.social avatar

You can't reason a person out of a stance they didn't reason themselves into.

For instance: How would you even begin to reason with someone that believes in demons? Where could any discussion even go if one side can waive away anything they don't agree with by claiming it is a trick from a demon?

aegisgfx877,
@aegisgfx877@kbin.social avatar

Just a general rule of thumb there little guy, when it comes to anything political if you find the nazis are on your side, you are on the wrong side.

Aesthesiaphilia,

Kumbaya

AnonTwo,

They want the bar for the traffic. They can start their own bar but the extreme nature of it deters people from even setting foot.

They want to sit in places that look neutral or even friendly.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

True, agreed. I’m only commenting on the idea that these people or groups shouldn’t get free advertising when people find them. These posts that are blasting their way to the top of “hot” just like a trending news article are counter-productive. On the Internet, which is fundamentally always at least partially an uncontrolled environment, it’s better take actions for these things that are as invisible as possible.

AnonTwo,

So here's my issue here.

This guy is clearly not a small issue. He's being as loud and obnoxious as possible.

If there's nothing in place to deal with one huge troublemaker, what's to stop a dozen who come to Kbin and start making hateful communities?

My concern at this point is that Kbin itself gets defederated because the other instances don't think it's taking moderation seriously.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

In what way is it a huge deal? In what way was it loud? (Until now)

This person had a handful of heavily downvoted posts and interactions so they never made it to the “hot” or “active” pages.

(Are we talking about the same person?)

If you take a poll of everyone in this thread I would bet almost everyone hadn’t seen these posts or heard of the username.

But now they have, with the help of this post.

Aesthesiaphilia,

You missed the whole point.

He said,

what's to stop a dozen who come to Kbin and start making hateful communities?

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

That’s exactly my point. Even when there are better moderating tools and the site admins have time to delete magazines, they will still pop-up faster then you can stop them. No site on the internet has ever fully solved this issue.

Since that is the reality, by avoiding inadvertently promoting them before they’re removed, a site is much more efficient at managing the workload.

Posts like this can have the unintended consequence of spawning more trolls or objectionable actors, this can and does actually make the site management harder.

Aesthesiaphilia,

I think with better moderation tools, it's absolutely possible to silence hate speech. The modern sanitized internet has managed to do it with child porn, which was EVERYWHERE in the wild west days. It's possible with motivation.

Hate speech is profitable, so companies generally have a profit incentive to keep it around. The fediverse doesn't.

AshDene,
@AshDene@kbin.social avatar

Speaking for myself I've seen both 10A and ps making these comments. 10A has managed to amass at least -2732 downvotes, ps -653, that's not a trivial amount of interaction. I came across an antiwoke post on the front page (I think just right after it was posted, so bad luck). And I'm holding off advocating people move to kbin until I see a moderating policy that results in banning them.

SpacemanSpiff,
@SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social avatar

It sounds like you were viewing the “new” tab?The hot/active tabs on Kbin wouldn’t receive that content so early. It will always be a wackamole game, no platform will ever succeed 100%. Once there are more advanced moderation tools, I would suggest silently removing objectionable content or users.

Also, I’ll have to disagree slightly, thats not a lot of interaction. This single post alone has over 300 upvotes since posted. The volume of either is simply an indication of how strongly people react.

AshDene,
@AshDene@kbin.social avatar

It sounds like you were viewing the “new” tab?

I don't think so, but I couldn't swear to it.

thats not a lot of interaction

Probably we just have different thresholds for a lot. People seeing hate 3000 times on the platform seems like a lot to me.

TipRing,
@TipRing@kbin.social avatar

Respectfully, I disagree. If you are running a bar and a nazi comes in with all their nazi periphranalia and orders a drink and behaves. You still kick them out. Because if you don't the next time they will bring all their nazi friends and it will be much harder to kick them out and then your other patrons stop showing up because of all the nazis around and now you are running a nazi bar.

Ban hate trolls. Ban them immediately. Because if that content festers on the site it will be much harder to ban later.

wahming,

Respectful Behavior

We expect all users to treat each other with respect and kindness. Harassment, hate speech, or any other form of harmful behavior will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to remove any content or user that violates these guidelines.

Isn't this standard for anywhere that doesn't want to end up as T_D or 4chan?

static,
@static@kbin.social avatar

The posts itself are not rulebreaking, but i could be wrong.
But the reply here is breaking the rules
https://kbin.social/m/antiwoke/t/101045/Time-to-reject-the-extreme-trans-lobby-harming-our-society

That's mostly the problem with those posts, while not rule breaking, they are hate magnets.

If the moderator refuses to properly moderate the comments this would be a proper reason for a ban.

AnonTwo,

Incidentally the person breaking the rules is making the biggest stir in this thread about not banning people.

Guy literally is advocating beating people to death as a good Christian moral while also trying to advocate he shouldn't be banned for it.

10A,

No, I did not advocate for beating people to death, and I would never advocate for that. Try reading the whole post and not taking a few words out of context.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

And these are the people who would lecture about prejudice... Nothing but prejudicial bad faith in this entire thread.

Being a filthy reactionary, I was really hoping that the fediverse could become something like the reddit of 10 years ago, but it seems like the dyed-in-the-wool redditors couldn't help but bring their intolerance with them.

Thank you for actually bothering to stand your ground. God bless.

AnonTwo,

The whole post was even more disgusting. Others are welcome to read it, Static linked it, but I stand by what I said.

If the devil did exist, he resides in your church, raising monsters.

wahming,

they are hate magnets.

And they were posted with the intent to be so. That suffices in my opinion. It's not the lone post itself, but the context of the magazine as a whole.

If the moderator refuses to properly moderate the comments

Yes, the mod of antiwoke is about to exercise proper judgement

smokinjoe,
@smokinjoe@kbin.social avatar

What a fuckin psychopath.

AnonTwo,

I mean, one of those examples is

"Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society"

That is a global rule violation on most sites. Hate speech.

PenguinJuice,

Genuinely curious what is hateful about that? Rejecting something does not equal hate or I guess I need to file a claim against universities and friends who rejected me.

Ragnell,
@Ragnell@kbin.social avatar

"extreme trans lobby" is a conspiratorial misrepresentation of a group of people who would just like to live their lives.

PenguinJuice,

Source?

Aesthesiaphilia,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Chcc_Ci36Vw&pp=ygUVZmVpc3Qgc2VhIGxpb24gd29tYW4g

AnonTwo,

Let me take one excerpt from that thread and I want you to ask that again

Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable.

And to summarize: He's basically advocating "good Christian morals" as being transphobic.

But also to the original post: It is wording the advocates for trans people as being extremists who are harming our society.

HopeOfTheGunblade,
@HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social avatar

Did they claim that you were harming society?

sadreality,

clowns always trying to censor somebody... hunting for some low level degenerate to turn him into "antihero"

these people can't seem to just enjoy a place with out starting a witch hunt

10A,

m/Clowns would like a word with you.

Balssh,

I disagree: better to kill the evil in its infancy, rather than let it spread and hope it goes away by its own.

albinanigans,

Nah, we're nipping this shit in the bud because the shitposting is only the Trojan horse.

This shit's already here. Now we gotta shine a light on it and deal with it.

VerifiablyMrWonka,
@VerifiablyMrWonka@kbin.social avatar

Ha, I blocked the worst offender in the comments here, refreshed the page and now there are like... 6.

10A,

Hello, you who cannot see me. I'm all for blocks over bans.

rastilin,

Block them too. They're not going to engage in good faith anyway.

VerifiablyMrWonka,
@VerifiablyMrWonka@kbin.social avatar

Oh, no no. It was that I blocked one person and there were only 6 other comments left (all fine) :D

Blocking a person seems to remove any comment tree they're a branch in (i.e. their posts and all responses to those posts)

aegisgfx877,
@aegisgfx877@kbin.social avatar

Ive decided not to block him so I can follow him around annoying him and downvoting everything he says

10A,

<3

minnieo,
@minnieo@kbin.social avatar

i disagree with him obviously, but this just makes us (the people opposing him) look bad, dont do that

FIST_FILLET,
@FIST_FILLET@kbin.social avatar

plus, engaging with assholes usually just prompts them to continue being assholes. it's a lose-lose

HamSwagwich,
@HamSwagwich@kbin.social avatar

Ive decided not to block him so I can follow him around annoying him and downvoting everything he says

Perfect example of why voting should be public!

Blocking him is the right answer, it's the right thing to do and solves the problem of him presenting posts you don't want to see.

magnetosphere,
@magnetosphere@kbin.social avatar

Those “antiwoke” people disgust me. I encourage disagreements. I don’t encourage thinly veiled hate disguised with code words. Tolerance isn’t “far left”.

10A,

Tolerance of evil kind of is far left.

Infiltrated_ad8271,
@Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social avatar

It belongs to the extremes, it is really worrying if you think that only in one of them.

Kill_joy,
@Kill_joy@kbin.social avatar

It's a fucking circle, mate

artisanrox,
@artisanrox@kbin.social avatar

not really lol far lefties just want to use the bathroom without getting harassed or murdered

slicedcheesegremlin,
@slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social avatar

yeah "far left" in the US is just wanting basic human rights, something something overton window.

stillnotahero,

The far-right brings messages of hate, violence, intolerance, and attempts to pass legislation to justify their views. The far-left has brought us the weekend, the 40 hour work week, child labor laws, etc…

Aesthesiaphilia,

Not to mention the insidious evil of clean drinking water and food that won't poison you.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

the far-right

who?

messages of hate, violence

such as?

intolerance

the tu quoque is almost too tempting here

pass legislation to justify their views

this is a joke, right?

Oh, and I didn't know people like Henry Ford and the 2nd Baron Trent were "far-left". I guess the horseshoe really does exist after all.
Stop beating strawmen, your ideological muscles are only gonna atrophy further.

exscape,
@exscape@kbin.social avatar

the tu quoque is almost too tempting here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

We can't be tolerant of people who are intolerant towards e.g. LGBT people; it doesn't work out in the end.

Alstjbin,

The apparent paradox is solved by viewing tolerance as a social contract. Only those who adhere to the contract and are tolerant of others can have a claim to receive that same tolerance. Similarly those who are intolerant should have no expectation to be tolerated since they do not adhere to the social contract which should provide that tolerance.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

Nonsense, we most certainly can. In fact, most countries "worked out" without ever needing to be tolerant in the first place.

Popper doesn't even acknowledge that this notion can be universalized, and then you're just back to square one with Carl Schmitt and the Concept of the Political.

Take your LGBT example. For that to work, you must be intolerant of, say, Salafis. Then the Salafi can respond that his in-group (the faithful, true to God, whatever) are being threatened by those who must necessarily be intolerant of him by nature of their own allegiance.

Thus you still end up with a value judgment despite Popper's veneer of neutralization and depoliticization. That's where the real philosophizing begins. How do you justify allegiance to one side of the friend/enemy distinction over the other?

curiosityLynx,

Except you don't have to be intolerant of Salafis. They can be Salafis or not for all I or anyone else cares, what matters is whether they hate people for who they are and spread or communicate that hate.

I'm personally not entirely sure about male to female trans athletes being allowed to compete in female-only leagues and am concerned about the wisdom of allowing sex change procedures for minors that weren't born intersex. I wouldn't marry a trans person and if a close family member suddenly came out as trans I might have long discussions with said family member for a while,

But that's it. I wouldn't even dream of hating someone for being trans or demonizing people who are. Even if I had religious beliefs against that kind of stuff it would at worst make me worry about such a person or make me pray for them.

If I were a moderator of a public space, I'd allow them to talk there without fear so long as they're not actively attacking others, same as any other group.

Likewise, you can believe that trans people are wrong and will go to whatever equivalent of hell your belief system has and I would tolerate you as long as you are civil about it, come from a position of compassion and empathy and don't try to force people to listen to you (like by using multiple accounts to circumvent blocks and/or bans) who have clearly communicated that they don't want to hear you anymore (same goes in the other direction, btw) and don't try to incite others to treat them as anything other than fellow human beings.

If someone from either side can't do that, that person lacks tolerance and in turn can expect the same level of tolerance being directed to them.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

Salafism kind of requires you to be intolerant of people for who they are, but let's not pretend these people would lend the same "live and let live" thinking to a Catholic bishop who espoused the views of a Salafi mullah when it comes to homosexuals.

But I get where you're coming from and your position is entirely reasonable. The problem is just that your attitude is not that of this thread and the OP. If you actually look at this 10A guy's posts you'll find nothing that merits the response you see in this thread. I'd say there's a long way to overstepping the threshold of civility on that part, but in this thread people already want heads on spikes, so to speak.

stillnotahero,

Alright you caught me in a good mood, so I’ll throw some articles out here to explain my line of thinking. I hope you’ll see I’m not arguing with strawmen.

Article from October of last year describing right wing outrage to drag shows.

Fast forward to recent months and it appears that words have turned to action, in the form of legislation

I believe some else mentioned the Paradox of Tolerance, but I will link it again just in case you missed it.

I hope this clears up my line of thinking. No invisible boogymen here - just some examples of,
In my opinion, things changing for the worst. And if you were not arguing in good faith… oh well.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

Yeah I get where you're coming from but this all hinges on the concept of Popper's Open Society taken to its most extreme.
Have you ever considered why this whole "children must be able to see drag shows" notion didn't show up just 20 years ago?

Idk, this kind of devil-on-the-wall "this is trans GENOCIDE" rhetoric when it comes to shit like increasing penalties for indecent exposure and not allowing children to attend drag shows really just says the quiet part out loud.

MrMonkey,

The “Paradox of Tolerance” is garbage. An interesting thought experiment where Popper came to the wrong conclusions. You can’t believe in “Freedom of Speech” AND “The Paradox of Tolerance”. They’re incompatible.

plato.stanford.edu/entries/toleration/

I’ll take “freedom of speech” over “governmental censorship” any day.

Because nobody thinks about what happens if a fundie takes power and decides that abortion is “intolerable” and arrests people who make pro-choice arguments because they’re being offensive. Or if anyone makes fun of religion, that’s intolerance and you must go to jail.

TLDR: Fuck “The Paradox of Tolerance”. It’s dumb.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

Mhm..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJsf5QY12rg

00,
@00@kbin.social avatar

How is one guy saying (to extremely paraphrase) "some people have used the label of freedom to exploit vulnerable people" relevant to this? Like, thats a given, that some people will use this as a guise. Now, is there a systematic problem of leftists arguing for the freedom to assault children? No, only in the imagination of projecting right-libertarians.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

Michel Foucault, Gayle Rubin and Judith Butler aren't just "some people", they are three of the most influential thought leaders of the (post-)modern Left. Foucault of course being joined by heavyweights like Derrida, Lyotard, Deleuze, de Beauvoir, Sartre, Barthes etc. etc. and so on and so forth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petition_against_age_of_consent_laws

The point of course being that this thread is full of idiots who have never even heard of the likes of Foucault or truly appreciate how badly they jumped the gun here (turns out there was still some "intolerance" left). Your cult of transgression and tolerance is not philosophically sound.

livus,
@livus@kbin.social avatar

With all due respect poststructuralist academics (many of whom are dead) are not the sociocultural leaders of anyone.

That 1977 petition is heinous, but I don't think that being influenced by poststructuralism some 47 years later means anyone has to agree with those politics.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

Survived just fine through Judith Butler though.

When I took a couple of critical theory oriented literary courses at uni these were the names that came up again and again, but there was no mention of their ultimate transgression. This is how the myth of an entirely dangerous right and an entirely harmless left is propagated. Just don't mention the bad parts of the left and create one continuous antagonist group out of everyone from Ted Cruz to Heinrich Himmler. Every rightist is implicated in the actions of their most radical thought leaders, but leftists are afforded the luxury of not associating with characters like Foucault, Lenin or Mao at their own leisure.

And I know that you know this but a "thought leader" doesn't need to be alive, so that's not really an argument. These people are tremendously influential and popular in our time (and Butler and Rubin aren't even dead), as demonstrated by the negative response to the Derrick Jensen lecture clip linked above.

livus,
@livus@kbin.social avatar

Tangential but it's wild to me that you studied Gayle Rubin repeatedly and the pedophilia angle somehow didn't come up. It's literally right there in her writing. Her work was only referenced in one postgrad course I took and 99% of the class totally hated on her for it.

I have to say I don't think this "rightist"/"leftist" paradigm is really working in this discussion. It's way too simplistic and implies that there are two monolithic worldviews at different ends of a linear compendium. But that's just not the case. Many of the theorists don't even agree with each other, or with their own past selves, etc etc.

And in the grassroots a lot of it doesn't even filter down. Soup kitchen workers who never read any of Butler's word salads, junior investment partners who haven't even read Adam Smith...

Sapere aude. The world is too interesting and complex to narrow down to two "ideologies".

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

The main crit lit course was undergrad and at a European uni (with an American professor) so it was all pretty superficial, but the prof didn't exactly volunteer the ugly sides of these thinkers (as he most certainly would have done with a Carl Schmitt or a Heidegger). The other course (also undergrad) was even less rigorous, just a quick once-over of the basics of oppression and yada yada, namedropping Marcuse/Foucault/Derrida but never dissecting them.

The point of mentioning this wasn't to say that I'm some kind of particular expert on these thinkers (I am not) but rather that my experience with their presentation is that they are left as likeable as possible (there were years between me hearing of Foucault and realizing he was a nonce, whereas people usually learn that someone like Heidegger was a nazi before they even know how his name is pronounced).

I 100% agree on the uselessness of the left/right-dichotomy as it stands, particularly because the radical right gets lumped in with liberal individualists like Adam Smith/Ayn Rand/Ronald Reagan etc., which makes no sense at all.

Still, there are some essential axioms that can be used to distinguish the left and the right, those being equality+liberalism vs. disparity+illiberalism. There is a natural reason that the pedophiles aren't garnering support among the ranks of the far right and that white nationalists won't find much love among the far left.

livus,
@livus@kbin.social avatar

Your experience sounds unfortunate. It was pretty darn weird of them to gloss over Foucault and not Heidegger! Irresponsible, even.

I'm not American, and find some of their conflations between politics, social policy, and economic policy a little hard to get behind. It's far from universal.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

Yeah, irresponsible is the best word for it.
It's very tiresome to observe at length.

DarkGamer,
@DarkGamer@kbin.social avatar

Tolerance of evil kind of is far left.

@10A Hatred, bigotry, scapegoating of vulnerable minorities, lies, gaslighting, opposition to democracy and the rule of law is what defines the modern right. That is textbook evil, and you seem very committed to defending it. Look around, those left of you do not tolerate it. Almost every other comment is from people who want to block you or show you the door. Features are being added to this platform to specifically block your hate speech.

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

fedosyndicate,
@fedosyndicate@kbin.social avatar

I agree, I think it's good to have a discussion, and polite disagreement is quite acceptable. But like you said, encouraging violence and hatred is not acceptable to me.

MonochromeObserver,
@MonochromeObserver@kbin.social avatar

I agree with others that you just gave that ps guy what they wanted: attention. You should've messaged ernest directly to ask him for better report tools.

Meanwhile, go to beehaw if you need better protection from people like him.

kestrel7,
@kestrel7@kbin.social avatar

Yeah I was worried this could become a problem, because I imagine a lot of chuds are turned off of lemmy because of the tankie devs. Which makes sense. But I don't think they should be welcome here, either. I'm trying to get away from that authoritarian shit, not get closer to the even worse kind of authoritarian shit.

10A,

Hold on, I dislike authoritarianism too. Isn't it authoritarian to ban users and magazines for expressing views with which you disagree?

AnonTwo,

Isn't it authoritarian to beat to death people expressing views with which you disagree with?

Something which you all but advocated in the thread in question? You just want a platform to advocate far more extreme methods than bans.

10A,

No, not whatsoever. Try reading my entire comment on the purpose of freedom, and not cherrypicking a few words that look damning out of context.

Also, I wrote "with which" so you didn't need to add another "with" at the end.

Edit: This was a bad answer. See below.

AnonTwo,

You know, even if it was cherrypicked (which it was not, I stand by it, and you're welcome to try to actually argue how that's not what you said and not pretend I didn't read it)

I just asked

Isn't it authoritarian to beat to death people expressing views with which you disagree with?

You didn't answer with "I never said that"

You answered with

No, not whatsoever.

As far as I'm concerned you're just pretending to be a mature guy who wants people to debate, but in truth you just want to shame people away from the hate speech that's being spewed where people are either not responding or are making arguments in bad faith in response. Basically letting the text get onto the page and hoping everyone gives up.

10A,

I'm sorry. I was replying to a lot of comments, and I totally misunderstood yours. I thought you copied and pasted what I wrote, and added the word "with", because it ends with "with which you disagree with". I only saw the grammatical error, not the complete change of question. Please forgive me.

Yes, of course it's authoritarian to beat someone to death for expressing a different view! Goodness, how is that even a question.

I answered "No, not whatsoever" to your assertion that "You just want a platform to advocate far more extreme methods than bans."

I do like to debate, but I also like to keep things on topic, so I've been kinda trying to avoid debates in this thread, while also standing up for the relevant aspects of my rather unpopular opinions.

I certainly don't want to shame anyone for anything, and if I've inadvertently done that, I'm sorry.

smokinjoe,
@smokinjoe@kbin.social avatar

No. You can always fuck off to stormfront.

meat_popsicle,

Is TruthSocial just not up your alley?

aegisgfx877,
@aegisgfx877@kbin.social avatar

Trunff Censhall!

Harlan_Cloverseed,
@Harlan_Cloverseed@kbin.social avatar

We don’t want you here, bigot.

Zorque,

If it's just about disagreement, sure. But it's not, it's about whether you accept the paradox of the tolerance of intolerance.

Aloomineum,

If there's more people here like 10A it would be great if you could speak up so I could keep building my block list

ArugulaZ,
@ArugulaZ@kbin.social avatar

I've got a pretty good idea of what the "A" in "10A" stands for.

10A,

Amendment, if you must know.

Manifish_Destiny,

You seem like the type of person who drives weirdly slow past preschools. It's always you types of fuckers projecting their shit onto people they want excuses to hate.

Trans people are pedos? Find me 10 articles of incidents of a trans person getting arrested for pedophilia in the last year.

I bet I can find 10 articles of priests and Christians raping kids in the past fucking month.

Quit projecting, get off the internet, look inward, and shut your fucking mouth.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12223171/First-responders-horrified-children-trans-drag-party-dead-body-drugs-sex-toys.html

https://news.sky.com/story/transgender-butcher-admits-abducting-and-sexually-abusing-schoolgirl-12883405

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/daycare-worker-arrested-child-porn-charges-same-probe-involving-ex-democrat-transgender-state-lawmaker

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article263759218.html

https://nypost.com/2022/11/02/prominent-new-york-trans-activist-arrested-for-allegedly-soliciting-a-minor/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11482001/Transgender-paedophile-25-identified-woman-groom-14-year-old-girl-got-pregnant.html

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/transgender-sex-offender-who-attacked-29765751

https://www.westernstandard.news/news/bc-transgender-pedophile-put-in-a-women-s-prison-with-a-mother-baby-unit/article_333ba790-ad3a-11ed-bf5e-1b58e162b92b.html

https://twitter.com/OliLondonTV/status/1651861965235539969?lang=en

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/woman-who-allegedly-told-cops-she-identifies-as-15-year-old-boy-arrested-for-sexting-runaway-teens/ar-AA1bGZLW

There you go, now hit me with the priests of the past month.

HelixDab,

Daily Mail
Fox News
NY Post
...And a Twitter account that doesn't link to a credible news source.

Would you like to try again without the sources that continually fail fact checks and exhibit a far right bias?

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

How predictable. Do you have any actual arguments beyond smearing the sources? Don't believe your lying eyes, right? Can you point to any factual inaccuracies in the articles linked or does your reasoning end at "they report inconvenient facts that don't show up on the NYT/CNN/MSNBC/BBC front pages so they must be biased".

And here's the source for the tweet. Didn't take a whole lot of effort to find (not that you even bothered ofc): https://www.cronicaviva.com.pe/pnp-arresta-a-sujeto-vestido-de-alumna-en-colegio-de-mujeres-en-huancayo-videos/

HelixDab,

I don't have to; you have to provide good sources to back up your claim. If I say that god exists, and then claim that the bible proves is, well, I'm not proving my point because I haven't yet given any solid evidence to my claims. This is how a debate works when your arguing like a rational adult.

And, for the record, CNN/NYT/et al. are also biased, but they're (usually) more factually based. Bias is not the same as factually incorrect; bias is reflected in which stories you choose to report, and what language you use in reporting. And example of a source that would be both unbiased and highly factual would be Reuters News Service, or the Christian Science Monitor. Similarly, Jabocin is strongly left-biased, but also highly factual.

Three of the sources you cited are not credible because they continually play fast and loose with facts and don't bother verifying information. One of them was unsourced entirely, and the backup you provide is not in English--or based in the US--which makes determining the veracity difficult.

In short, you aren't acting in good faith.

jonion,
@jonion@kbin.social avatar

"not in English--or based in the US--which makes determining the veracity difficult."
Not my fault that you can't read Spanish, and are you seriously implying that a Peruvian source should be automatically regarded as dubious? Un gringo tipico...

"you aren't acting in good faith"
lol

I get that you'd like nothing but Pravda articles confirming that the revolution is going swimmingly, but when you can't even provide a single example of a factual inaccuracy in any of the articles provided it's really hard to take you seriously.

genoxidedev1,

10 assholes?

Xeelee,
@Xeelee@kbin.social avatar

10xAdolf

Voyajer,
@Voyajer@kbin.social avatar

It's kind of impressive that that already have -2000 rep

BlackCoffee,

The more people who will get on the platform the easier it will be to shut the intolerant and bullshitters out.

albinanigans,

Sheesh, I know who that is already! I had them blocked ages ago. What a tool.

Tigbitties,
@Tigbitties@kbin.social avatar

Yeah, I really hope that shit gets nipped in the bud.

TooTallSol,

Thank you for exposing all the people who want kbin to be just like Reddit. If that is what kbin turns into then it can join spez right where he belongs.

Your calls for censorship should get YOU and your peers in this thread banned.

Harlan_Cloverseed,
@Harlan_Cloverseed@kbin.social avatar

Go hang out on Voat, bigot

szczur,
@szczur@kbin.social avatar

It's not censorship, it's keeping people acting in bad faith from easily act in derogatory ways actively harming people.

Aesthesiaphilia,

Nazi Punks Fuck Off

muftiboy,

cringe. grow up you fascist loser, go back to reddit

Harlan_Cloverseed,
@Harlan_Cloverseed@kbin.social avatar

Bigotry is not welcome here.

TheaoneAndOnly27,

Is there a way to block seeing any comments or posts from exploding heads?

rideranton,
@rideranton@kbin.social avatar

You can block domains if you click on the domain next to the post, go to the sidebar and block it like a magazine

shatteredsteel,
@shatteredsteel@kbin.social avatar

That hasn't been functioning for me, I've had to go to each magazine individually to block them.

If I click the button on the instance it doesn't do anything, I still see the posts in my feed. I've tried on a few of the non-english instances (since I don't know other languages).

Haan,

Why do you care? Is kbin.social not a free speech platform? If not, I’ll find somewhere else to go.

I don’t even agree with these folks, but if people are going to start raising a big stink because people are saying things they don’t like, I’m out.

10A,

I may disagree with what you have to say, but I'll fight to the death to defend your right to say it.

fosho,

until it’s hate speech. then you shouldn’t have the right to say it. because that makes you a dick-head who has broken the social contract.

szczur,
@szczur@kbin.social avatar

There's free speech in good faith, and the one in the bad. But that's not even about that. If someone's speech is basically "all trans people are a pedophiles and belong on the cross in defence of good christian values" (not a direct quote, just a representation) it's not free speech. It's hate speech and that kind of speech is not protected. Free speech is meant to protect voicing opinions. Thinking some people are not deserving of worthy living is not an opinion.

BobVersionFour,

I don’t even agree with these folks> if you sit at a table with 7 nazi that table contain 8 nazi

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • kbinMeta@kbin.social
  • random
  • meta
  • Macbeth
  • All magazines
    •