@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” #Moderation #kbin #kbin.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.”

  • ernest@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • LoafyLemon@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      A friendly reminder; Please don’t forget to take your time and step away from Kbin whenever you need a break. Your mental health is just as important, if not most important, for the project to succeed.

    • KTVX94@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I joined kbin recently and I’m kind of concerned about the implications of this. I don’t support those posts at all, but who gets to say what’s worth banning and what not? Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site? Or is it the specific instance that magazine is on that has the authority to ban what’s inside? How does all of this work?

      Edit: my bad, I got kbin and kbin.social mixed up. Noob mistake.

      • harmonea@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site?

        No, it’s exactly the opposite. The entire point of a decentralized federation is that while yes, the admin is in complete control of what content is allowed on his or her own instance, users who don’t like what the admin is doing can just spin up their own new instances.

        Ernest can ban this type of content if he likes. Others can take the kbin software and make a new instance where it’s welcome. Ernest can choose not to federate with that instance if they continue to push content that’s against his rules, but Ernest doesn’t have the power to dictate the direction for hundreds of millions of users’ experience like a certain centralized site’s mad CEO or admin board does.

        What would be against the nature of ActivityPub is if Ernest built something into the software to prevent it being used for types of content he doesn’t like, even on other instances.

      • lazy@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        @KTVX94

        While I kind of agree with you in being concerned about who gets to control what we see and don’t see and the censorship aspect, there is also “the paradox of tolerance” to be considered and maybe in that light it is correct to not tolerate that subs intolerance.

        Regarding the Paradox of Tolerance:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

      • Kierunkowy74@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        kbin.social administration controls only what is published on kbin.social, and what content from elsewhere kbin.social users can see. An user banned from kbin.social can make another account, on another site and start recreate there his banned community. kbin.social will be able to ban this remote user and remote community, but this restricts only what kbin.social users can see.

        Exactly the same for another /kbin or lemmy site - just replace the domain name accordingly.

      • updawg@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        It actually is one of the strengths of the decentralized nature of the Fediverse. But there are still growing pains associated with it.

      • livus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Remember, kbin.social is just one instance of kbin. Ernest banning something on kbin.social does not mean banning it from the fediverse.

        It could pop up on another fediverse site or even another kbin site.

      • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Fediverse is decentralized. The individual instances are not. Decentralization means that there’s no one person or organization with power over the entire network, but people absolutely can and should moderate their own instances. If you don’t like the moderation policies of once instance you can move to another.

    • Noki@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      thank you!

      I appreciate all you do and your quick respond.

      Multipile Things I noticed as a creater of this thread:
      can I close comments ?
      can I hide comments ?
      can I pin a response?
      can I quickly see from what server peope are interacting?

      I am no coder but would love to support you with all the work that is done.

      At least some of the costs can be taken of your shoulders:

      https://www.buymeacoffee.com/kbin

      Edit: Can you close this thread for me ?

      • ernest@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        1 year ago

        All the things you mentioned are in the roadmap. However, we can either do it quickly and potentially encounter issues in a few weeks or months, or take a bit more time for a more thorough approach. I’ve decided to move away from playful prototyping. From now on, every change will be tested before it’s approved for kbin.social - it’s no longer just my code (https://lab2.kbin.pub/). I’d like to close this thread for you… but can we just agree not to respond in it anymore? ;p

        • Hobovision@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think closing threads is a great idea or in keeping with how this all works. I think it’d be nice to be able to mute a thread as an individual, but by its nature these discussions are open and shared with many instances. If we close it on kbin.social, other kbin instances, lemmy instances, and even places like mastodon and pixelfed could keep discussing, if I understand activity pub correctly.

          • ernest@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            ·
            1 year ago

            In such important tasks, I would like to engage in community-driven development. When I start planning these tasks, I will come to you with my whiteboard and sketch out the individual stages. Together, we will look for the advantages and disadvantages of such a solution, the weak and strong points. This is to jointly make a decision on whether the change makes sense on kbin.social but also in the perspective of the entire federation. It can be a great fun ;)

          • Snapz@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Let’s all agree that of its many issues, locking/deleting open threats to targeted minority groups and pro supremacist propaganda meant to hurt or influence vulnerable people was NOT a drawback of the Reddit experience.

            Yes, it’s a difficult thing to enforce a subjective line of a basic standard of decency, but it’s also what a society is and one of the main reasons we gather as people. The quality of a group is shown in how they accommodate the weakest and most vulnerable among them.

            If we aren’t prioritizing a way to send this CHUD and people liked them to the hypothetical edge of town, to be sure they can’t bombard the young person struggling with their gender identity with targeted hate at their weakest moment, then what are we doing here?

    • slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everyone appreciates your effort here, ernest. Spez hasn’t gotten 92 upvotes on a comment in years lmao despite Reddit having millions of users, it really shows how the difference.

    • Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Could you clarify what you would do in cases like this? Censor based on misinterpretation of the clickbait headline, even if it does not contain hate content at all?

    • HidingCat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow, more new servers! Looks like the growth has been really explosive. It wasn’t that long ago you migrated Kbin to Fastly right?

    • cacheson@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly.

      I have been wondering how instance-wide moderation will end up looking on kbin, once you’ve had a chance to get a team in place for that. While it is (I assume) a “generalist” instance, it’s important to keep in mind that you can’t please everyone. Trying to have too broad of an audience will just result in retaining those with a high tolerance for toxicity (usually highly toxic themselves), while everyone else leaves in favor of better-managed spaces.

      Communities in general, and particularly on the internet, need to understand what their purpose is, and be proactive about filtering out those that are incompatible with that purpose. This doesn’t mean judging those people as wrong, or “bad people”, it just means recognizing that not everyone is going to get along, and that some level of group cohesion needs to be maintained.

      • atypicaloddity@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agreed, that’s part of my problem with generalist instances. They’re so broad that they serve multiple communities with differing expectations, and it forces admins to take sides.

        • cacheson@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think there is value in having both generalist and specialized instances, and the big landing spots for new users should probably strive to be more generalist. As you point out though, there are limits to how broad of an audience one can practically cater to.

  • magnetosphere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

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

    • fedosyndicate@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

          • stillnotahero@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            1 year ago

            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…

            • jonion@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

                • Alstjbin@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  16
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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?

              • stillnotahero@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                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@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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.

                  https://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.

          • 00@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            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@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              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@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                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@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

        • 10A@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Agreed, though that’s not a common term, and the non-authoritarian left is approximately center-left. The center-left is opposed to wokeism, like Bill Maher. The center-left is pro-free-speech. All of the desire to ban speech that you see throughout this thread is extreme AuthLeft, to use that terminology.

  • Aloomineum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    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

  • bumbly@readit.buzz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    “free speech” absolutists can host their stuff on their own instance. No need to do it here.

    • minnieo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      agreed. im left wing and i dont agree with totally shutting conservatives down, or we will just seem like a censoring platform. i want them away from the general public, away from me, and their little communities (which will no doubt feed into itself and become more and more hateful) need to be heavily monitored and properly moderated for violent as well as hate speech, because theyre literally the only ones who ever have that issue of devolving into a straight up cult-like hate group anywhere they go. they for sure need to make their own instance and fuck off, supervised like children of course

  • Bobo_Palermo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Simply don’t go to that magazine? Fuck, people…censorship is bad, but it sounds like kbin is committed to it. Is there a community I can join that has full free speech? This is a serious question.

  • LollerCorleone@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Its nice to see all the bigots popping up in one place. Makes it easier to block them. And we really need to get some instance level mods.

  • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    The frothing hysteria over “wokeness” (ie treating your fellow humans with respect) is just a smokescreen by the oil industry, which hopes it will take some pressure off it for, you know, slowly killing us all with global warming. You do know this, don’t you?

    I went through a young Republican phase, too. Then I realized that the party had nothing to offer ordinary people but contempt and cynical manipulation. Like telling people that they can be good Christians by doing the exact opposite of what Christ did. Like pitting Americans against each other for their differences. Like convincing people that the former president, a monster by any objective standard, is this country’s savior when it’s clear that he’s just shaking the nation for loose change.

    It’s called “wokeness” because we finally opened our eyes, saw what was happening all around us, and decided to do something about it. You can either recognize the evil in this world, or become another oblivious victim of it.

    • esc27@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Real progress and change takes work and money. Inflated social issues can be “solved” with policy. This whole mess is just policial theater that creates the illusion of governance at the expense of minorities.

    • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Every downvote is a sweet, sweet tear trickling down from the chubby cheek of an incel sociopath who was pre-emptively blocked. Delicious! Your agony sustains me!

      • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not really. There is millions visibly spent on lobbying efforts against climate change, and invisibly stockholders invested in energy are board members of media companies. For example Jack Cockwell has over a billion dollars in Brookfield hedge fund, and that fund has been increasing it’s holdings in energy for the last decade. There’s some BCE board member that has millions of dollars in Wajax stocks (industrial equipment manufacturer), about half his net worth.
        If you talk about industries with influence on one another from the perspective of ownership, you’ll find it’s all very incestuous as the richest people will diversify.
        Weirdly, the people involved in Fox News only seem to own stock in FOX, but cash contributions to those people aren’t shown in the market data I’m looking at. Maybe I’m not looking in the right places, but I’m not a finance person.

    • szczur@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh boy, an enlightened centrist!

      If you cannot differentiate between people actively stepping up to a literal anti-human propaganda from people posting it, perhaps you should fuck off, too.

      • hydro033@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh boy, here we go with the enlightened centrists label. Disagree with somethings on the left and right and now you’re also a huge problem. Bravo

        • szczur@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You are, because the guy we are talking about literally chose the appeasement rhetoric. And that’s pretty enlightement centrist-y.

          Both sides are equally bad bullshit.

    • Borgzilla@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As a non-american, I find americans to be very intense when it comes to politics. I just hope that we don’t start importing their culture war bullshit into our country.

  • kestrel7@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • PenguinJuice@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    People are allowed to have a difference of opinion. You don’t get to silence people just because you disagree with them. Please do not go down that dark path.

    Believe it or not there are people who do not subscribe to certain views, bur that does not make them “hate mongerers” anymore than the extreme opposition. It’s only extremists and people who try to silence others for their views that are assholes. You live in a great big world full of a lot of differing opinions and that’s what makes it beautiful. Silencing opinions because of your personal beliefs is not acceptable.

  • HubertManne@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    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

  • Haan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • static@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    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?

    • AnonTwo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • wahming@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      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?

        • AnonTwo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • czech@faux.moe
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            They will always advocate for blocking over banning because they can easily make new accounts to spread their hateful message. To block a user you must first read their message; their mission is accomplished.

            Should the community have to continually deal with this baggage so that hateful people can intentionally misinterpret what “free speech” means?

          • 10A@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

            • AnonTwo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

            • jonion@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

        • wahming@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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

    • Balssh@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • albinanigans@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • rastilin@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        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@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

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

          • rastilin@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            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@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              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@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                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 ® 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.

            • h34d@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

          • AshDene@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            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@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              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!

              • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

              • AshDene@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

            • albinanigans@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

              • updawg@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

        • 10A@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • aegisgfx877@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            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.

          • effingjoe@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            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?

            • unsophisticated@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I went through 3 pages of their comments and what I‘ve read were respectful and well articulated comments from someone quite religious and with conservative values.

              Maybe I missed some extreme stuff but I wouldn’t be surprised if you guys are completely making this up.

              • hypelightfly@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Go further, where they reminisce about the time when “homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp” which made it rare for anyone to think such behavior (being homosexual) was acceptable.

                Their view that freedom shouldn’t include the freedom to “exercise perverted pleasures of the flesh”.

                They are a modern nazi going full fascist to destroy the others they hate.

                • cottonmon@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Holy shit, he has a post that basically equates being gay with murderers and thieves. He also refuses to look at evidence from sources that he perceives as left-leaning. That person is unhinged.

          • AnonTwo@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            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@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

      • smokinjoe@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        and not intervene unless it grows beyond manageability.

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

        • SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • AnonTwo@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            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@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              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@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                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@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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.

          • icydefiance@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

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

            • SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              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.

            • SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

              • smokinjoe@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                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@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  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”.

              • wahming@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                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…

        • slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

      • zedtronic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        #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@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            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. :)

          • mark@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            No such thing as free speech on these “niche” social platforms. Pitchforks and torches, if this was real-life they’d be throwing you in a pond tied up and waiting for you to float…

            • blightbow@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              14 day old account on its home instance, its only posting activity is within this thread, and both comments are low effort outrage farming with images.

              The emotionally evocative hyperbole in the second sentence was pretty good though. Is it your own material? If so, can you write some more persecution porn for us? You don’t need images as your crutch, you’ve got some real writing talent going for you here.

              • mark@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                A picture is worth a thousand words and just sums up this toxic thread and witch hunt.

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        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@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • AshDene@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            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@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              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@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

            • SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              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@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

      • TipRing@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • mack123@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

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

            • mack123@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              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@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          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@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            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@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

    • sadreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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