Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Voat Is Shutting Down

voat.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 671 posts

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#481

Post by UncleMeat »

concordDance wrote: post #383
ianmcgowan wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One person's witch hunt is another's "defense of tolerance". There's definitely a line where free speech runs into ideas and positions that are not compatible with free speech, e.g. how can you have a reasoned discussion with a Nazi if they believe certain groups are literally subhuman, and you happen to be part of (or even have normal human empathy for) one of those groups. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_t…

> how can you have a reasoned discussion with a Nazi if they believe certain groups are literally subhuman, and you happen to be part of (or even have normal human empathy for) one of those groups. Well... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis I've had interesting discussions about whether or not people like me should be allowed to vote or breed and whether people like me not existing would make the world a mor…

Daryl Davis doesn't scale. Everybody likes to point at him but there is a reason why he is a unique case. Especially since it would be trivial for fascists to monopolize his time by just claiming to be open to discussion while actually not being interested in changing their views. This is why Davis holds his conversations in private. When done in public, his approach is exploitable to create a seemingly legitimate channel to spread fascist propaganda.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#482

Post by dotancohen »

UncleMeat wrote: post #475
dotancohen wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So each time a post "just asking questions" is posted, close it with a link to the explanation of why the idea has already been debunked. Just like a Bugzilla dupe or a StackOverflow dupe.

Now do this 1,000 times. Now 10,000 times. It is trivial to suck all the air out of a forum by repeatedly posting this.

Spam detection has been a feature of email clients for a long time. I'm sure even a rudimentary automated detection mechanism could prevent a significant portion of the dupes.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#483

Post by lordCarbonFiber »

MisterTea wrote: post #417
esperent wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can we discuss if overweight people should pay more for sits in a plane? Can we discuss if a trans male who identifies herself to be a woman should be allowed to take part in female sport competition (box, running)? I am afraid we no longer can discuss such "uncomfortable" topics You can debate those things on reddit without being censored on a lots of subreddits. However, the reason these are such contentious topi…

> ou did not bring them up in good faith, for example, you just used obese and trans people to make a point. You are one of the people the gp is mentioning. Those two are excellent points. There are a lot of people who are uncomfortable with those topics but are open to discussing them. Then people like you come out of the woodwork and accuse them of some nonsensical uptight bullshit and crap on their legitimate ques…

We live in a world where google exists, hell where scihub exists. It's extremely suspicious to show up in a forum "asking questions" when these resources exist. Getting told to "fuck off" in this context is basically being told to RTFM. You can look in my comment history to find just how easy it was to compile some sources to discredit the idea that trans women in sports is some unknown taboo.

If we spent just a fraction of the effort making spaces safer for marginalized groups as we do debating bad faith actors the internet would be a much better place in my opinion.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#484

Post by Brian_K_White »

xeromal wrote: post #191
Brian_K_White wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heartfelt and well written? "I know I’m going to get a hundred PMs from all of Voat’s hottest girls (Voat has some hot women, fact) with tips and tricks on how to help me keep it up."

Yeah, he sounds kind of like a jokester but it was a fun read. Feels way more genuine than any of our "incredible journey" hangups

those are trying

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#485

Post by UncleMeat »

anshumankmr wrote: post #201
nkrisc wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's extreme about any of that? Seems pretty tame.

There are a tonne of tankies on the site. Some who claim Holodomor was fake, Tianmen square was an exaggeration and the DPRK/China are heroes, Fidel Castro was a benevolent dictator and that everyone who escaped his regime was a slave owner.

Here is the secret: most leftists don't like tankies. Ban them as well I say! I people want to defend Stalin's murderous regime then I don't want them there either. Appealing to some hypocrisy here isn't super useful since the large bulk of people who don't want fascists on their webforums also don't want tankies.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#486

Post by ashtonkem »

marvin wrote: post #344
ashtonkem wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Folks can rant about free speech all they want, but no sane person would actually want to experience it. Always remember that "free speech" is 100% about the right to say what you want and not be prosecuted for it . It has never, ever been about the social consequences of any particular one person's speech. Insulting your boss and getting fired isn't an abridgement of free speech, neither is getting banned from the…

This is the canonical meme of free speech, but there's a corollary that is becoming increasingly relevant. People who repeat what you just wrote usually seem to ignore it: If every arena where people actually meet is privately owned, and all of these places agree on what ideas are valid topics of discussion, the effect on society will largely be the same as if a state actor suppressed free speech. We're not quite the…

> This is the canonical meme of free speech

That's a pretty dismissive way to say "jurisprudence".

> If every arena where people actually meet is privately owned, and all of these places agree on what ideas are valid topics of discussion, the effect on society will largely be the same as if a state actor suppressed free speech.

The concept that you're edging up to here is called "State Action". It's the idea that there are times and places where a private actor meets some sort of condition that makes them act so much like a government, that we hold them to the standards that we hold other governments, including all of the amendments and their existing jurisprudence.

While the Supreme Court has held up the concept of State Action, they've narrowed it significantly. The major case where State Action was upheld, Marsh vs. Alabama, the private actor in this case built a literal town. Since then the Supreme Court has been narrowing the precedent in this case, a process called "Limiting a case to its facts". Recent cases about State Action have had the court restrict State Action to "powers traditionally exclusive to the state", which does not include things like Twitter.

> People who repeat what you just wrote usually seem to ignore it:

This is both unnecessarily insulting, it's also wrong. People do talk about this stuff a lot, myself included. The fact that your reading list doesn't overlap with anyone who knows the jurisprudence here is your fault, not my fault.

> As a current example, consider if Facebook, Twitter and reddit all agree that any discussion asking critial questions regarding transgender issues are grounds for expulsion

This might be a problem under anti-trust issues, but it's not a 1st amendment issue.

> We're not quite there yet. But there are numerous incidents that make me worried that this trend will leave us with a society that's net worse off. Or moves towards violent conflict as the suppressing the free exchange of ideas has economic consequences where those with social access to free speech arenas get better opportunities, leaving the rest without even the possibility of engaging.

This is always the heart of the "free speech on Twitter" argument, and it is always extremely poorly thought out. Are you suggesting that Twitter cannot moderate beyond the (very wide) bounds of the first amendment? Because those "Twitter mobs" you fear are protected speech; if Twitter is held to the first amendment then they cannot be removed. Or are you suggesting that Twitter do something about the "Twitter mobs", which implies moderating some people for what they say on Twitter, which isn't exactly the "free speech" you're advocating for.

You can't have it both ways.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#487

Post by nicoburns »

eska wrote: post #440
nicoburns wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> trans men would be competing in the male competitions, and seem to be invisible in the whole trans debate anyway. Something that was pointed out to me recently that I thought was quite insightful. The greater societal acceptance of trans men compared to trans women seems to parallel the greater societal acceptance of cis women presenting in a masculine way compared to cis men presenting in a feminine way. Which lea…

What? How about nobody cares about trans men in male competitions because they are at the bottom, so have no visibility because they don't make it to the big competitions where real money and fame is achieved?

I think (without endorsing this position), that it's because most people assume trans men would just compete in "female" competitions.

To me the truth of the matter is that this is a very complex issue with no simple answers. People altering their physiology through hormones obviously can give them advantages or disadvantages that others don't have. As can having different hormone mixes when growing or through puberty. As indeed can a myriad of other genetic factors.

I honestly can't think of a way to make this fair. Do you have any suggestions?

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#488

Post by sim0n »

optimalsolver wrote: post #334
d3nj4l wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hardcore believers from /r/The_Donald are on thedonald.win now. The place is as full of anti-semitism, racism and misogyny as you'd expect. It's a good place for a laugh every now and then, if you can stomach the hate.

How did they take the election loss?

They haven't.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#489

Post by jakelazaroff »

concordDance wrote: post #362
jakelazaroff wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pragmatically speaking, that will happen anyway. I’m not gonna use any platform that allows me to encounter Nazis. Voilà: the debate is stopped entirely, even though the platform has done nothing to stop it. And on that topic, do we really need to debate Nazis? Like, are we so committed to the idea of moral relativism that we can’t draw some lines? Because frankly, I have zero interest in debating with anyone whether…

> I’m not gonna use any platform that allows me to encounter Nazis The main reason you think of your political opponents as nazis is because you haven't been interacting with them and talking to them. "Nazi" as a label is pretty useless as there are dozens of beliefs that are associated with "Nazi" (normally used as a label for rejecting any of the core tenants of progressivism), most people called Nazis might agree…

Let’s look at a sample of posts on the Voat front page as of right now:

- Where else can I say “Kill yourself, you glowing n+gg+rf+gg+t landwhale k+ke” without being banned? Voat is the only place I know of where I can do that.

- The Holocaust is a lie. It didn’t happen, but it should have,

- Voat will go away but its deep disgust of jews will forever remain in my heart.

Slurs not censored in the actual posts, obviously. So, you’ll forgive me for thinking Voat is full of literal Nazis.

Edit, censored with plus signs because asterisks were italicizing the text.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#490

Post by vmchale »

ignoranceprior wrote: post #4

Voat was founded as a neutral free-speech platform. After alt-right extremists were booted off reddit, they found a new home there. The site was bombarded by /pol/ chan culture, and after that nobody else of other political persuasions really wanted to join. Kind of like that "paradox of intolerance" meme. Free speech platforms usually end up becoming extremist platforms. I remember going on voat a couple years ago a…

Same with parler. It's now totally dominated by weenieheads.
Post reply on HN