Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

Post by carnivalclown » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 7:02 PM UTC

BEEdwards wrote: post #29

Lot's "but this isn't free speech" in here, but that's exactly the point, free speech has been tried and it leads to shit holes like reddit and voat. Places you might visit, but wouldn't recommend or even admit to using in a mixed group. People talk about free speech like it's some goal, but in reality all people seem to do with it is make fun of fat people and post stolen naked pictures of celebrities. When confront…

Post by DanBC » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 7:07 PM UTC

bpicolo wrote: post #39

krapp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voat does not really support free speech, as per their user agreement: You may not use Voat to break the law, violate an individual's privacy, or infringe any person or entity’s intellectual property or any other proprietary rights. (...) You agree to not post anyone's sensitive personal information that relates to that person's real world or online identity. Do Not Incite Harm: You agree not to encourage harm agains…

Free speech doesn't mean "anything goes even if illegal"

Post by Joeboy » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 7:12 PM UTC

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #58

jeremiep wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats almost dangerous actually. The internet makes it easier than never before to isolate yourself with same-minded people. Once you do that, you're in a positive feedback loop to reinforce your beliefs and behaviours, no matter how wrong they may be. I don't think forums should cater to every subject, but they should be accessible to anyone interested.

Why should it be accessible specifically to the demographic known as "trolls"? Trolls push other demographics out, so they make their own spaces (imzy) and are then criticized for not allowing trolls?

Post by derefr » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 7:13 PM UTC

frou_dh wrote: post #60

BEEdwards wrote: post #29

Lot's "but this isn't free speech" in here, but that's exactly the point, free speech has been tried and it leads to shit holes like reddit and voat. Places you might visit, but wouldn't recommend or even admit to using in a mixed group. People talk about free speech like it's some goal, but in reality all people seem to do with it is make fun of fat people and post stolen naked pictures of celebrities. When confront…

> People talk about free speech like it's some goal, but in reality all people seem to do with it is make fun of fat people and post stolen naked pictures of celebrities. All people do in reality ... if for some reason you choose to disregard the huge number of fairly autonomous communities on Reddit? If I used that ultra-broad brush for HN, I'd say that all commenters here seem to do is post links to xkcd 927 and th…

Post by psyc » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 7:25 PM UTC

veddox wrote: post #103

krapp wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, it does. Free speech is an upper bound on human expression - anything less than absolute is something less than "free." I'm not advocating for this - sites should police certain illegal and immoral activities. Doing so is clearly in the benefit of society and the quality of any online community. But accepting this is subjugating free speech for the sake of cultural norms and legal necessity.

That is an extremely loose definition of freedom. Ever heard the dictum "One man's freedom ends where another's begins"? Or, as somebody once put it: "My freedom to swing my fist ends where your face begins." Liberty for all is only attainable when all restrict their individual liberty to accommodate others. If that isn't the foundation of your society, "homo homini lupus" is what you get.