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

621–630 of 671 posts

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#621

Post by stjohnswarts »

austhrow743 wrote: post #356
cwhiz wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit has usability problems by design. Reddit want to make it as obnoxious as possible to use on a mobile phone, so that you’ll download their stupid app. They also push you to login to view more content, so they can track you. Reddit is just a cesspool, and it’s by design. Absolutely nothing to do with scaling problems.

i.reddit.com works plenty fine. The site that pushes you to the app is just for your average idiot to find. A lot of the garbage we find obnoxious is training wheels for those idiots, and they love apps for everything as well. The persistent app nag is a benefit for the target user.

I'll remind you that not everyone who is not very computer literate is not necessarily an idiot. Lots of them just have better (in their opinion) things to do with their time. My uncle who has 2 doctorates is quite intelligent wouldn't know the first thing about reddit and he's certainly no idiot.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#622

Post by fulafel »

fulafel wrote: post #275
raldi wrote: post #84

Moderated communities beat unmoderated ones on any metric you can name. Always have, always will. Nobody wants to drink at a pub that won't throw out rude patrons.

There have been some pretty successful unmoderated (centrally) social networks. Email, Usenet, IRC come to mind. The moderation does happen in these but it's self organizing.

Also: the blogosphere, with pingbacks and RSS is a social network.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#624

Post by reducesuffering »

pii wrote: post #347
reducesuffering wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Me-first capitalists who think you can separate society from business are going to be the first people lined up against the wall and shot in the revolution,” he tweeted. “I'll happily provide video commentary.”[0] - Dick Costolo, former Twitter CEO [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/10/01/some-busi...

Context: he's not saying he'll start a revolution, he's saying one is coming regardless. And he doesn't want to be shot as a rich person. Maybe he also doesn't like how tech tends to ignore the consequences of the decisions they make. Bad example of leftism run amok and off target

> people will be shot

> “I’ll happily provide video commentary”

And your knee-jerk response is to defend other parts of his statement? It’s a perfect example of leftism amok because it’s a common one I’ve increasingly heard over the past few years about the indifference or glee to rich people dying.

We can easily flip this into a right-wing statement and it will be highly disapproved of.

“Right wing nationalists will think your statements excuse leftist tendencies towards violence, and shoot your for this in an uprising. I’ll happily provide commentary.”

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#625

Post by Cyberthal »

The site founder didn't like asking for donations, so he almost never did, and then he ran out of money. Overly principled people are often impractical.

Ruqqus is better in every way. Voat was obsolete.

The pious celebration of the HNers is amusing, but there is no reduction of free speech availability for the banned pro-Aryan right. If anything, their user experience will now improve. It is a consolidation.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#626

Post by pii »

reducesuffering wrote: post #624
pii wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context: he's not saying he'll start a revolution, he's saying one is coming regardless. And he doesn't want to be shot as a rich person. Maybe he also doesn't like how tech tends to ignore the consequences of the decisions they make. Bad example of leftism run amok and off target

> people will be shot > “I’ll happily provide video commentary” And your knee-jerk response is to defend other parts of his statement? It’s a perfect example of leftism amok because it’s a common one I’ve increasingly heard over the past few years about the indifference or glee to rich people dying. We can easily flip this into a right-wing statement and it will be highly disapproved of. “Right wing nationalists will…

No my knee reaction is not to have a knee jerk reaction.

Turnabout, sure, let's look at it. Your version of the statement hits me the same way as the original.

Kudos for that, btw. It's a really good equivalent statement.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#627

Post by mariusor »

totony wrote: post #611
mariusor wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say that the right to human dignity is being impinged upon by most of the *phobic types of discourse. [edit] A citation: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.asp...

This is a good point, but in my understanding of dignity was more of a physical "no slave" than a mental "respect." I'm having trouble finding a good definition of that. Edit: i also understood the basic rights to be a property of the system rather than the actions of people; e.g. you should be free whatever people think of you; right to happiness whatever enemies you have, etc. If words can deprive you of dignity, t…

It is a property of the system in as much as the system supports the individual in keeping its right. Think in terms of property and theft, and what system does to people stealing. I agree it's not a foolproof comparison, but I think the same principles apply.

On the other hand the problem is not about "thinking" hateful things (and there is a distinction about hateful and respectful that you seem to gloss over) but saying those things with the specific intention of lowering a person's (or group of persons) sense of self and dignity.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#628

Post by 0xBA5ED »

UncleMeat wrote: post #478
0xBA5ED wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is wrong on so many levels. You are encouraging witch hunts based on fear and paranoia. Moderation is about maintaining order, not slapping down baddies. You could argue that one leads to the other, but it's the difference in mindset that allows for effective moderation without the need for all that negativity.

> Moderation is about maintaining order, not slapping down baddies. That's the same thing. I have several friends who are professors of medieval history. For various reasons, fascists are really interested in medieval european history and like to attend conferences as "independent scholars". They pass out propaganda and harass scholars who have the gall to do things like discuss women in medieval europe or any form o…

>That's the same thing

I disagree. You can enforce behavioral restrictions without reducing it to us vs them. It is about order and maintaining good relations. In the case of people disrupting your conference, you can have them removed for their behavior without resorting to name calling and framing it like you're "fighting fascists". It's like policing. If you reduce it to "catching bad guys", you won't get good police.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#629

Post by HexagonalKitten »

sharatvir wrote: post #87
dlp211 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a disgrace that people have taken to discussing politics in a democratic-republic?

I generally hear this sentiment from those who are self proclaimed “centrists” and are relatively unaffected by politics. It’s a little sad how many people think political discussion shouldn’t take place in democratic countries.

There's a difference between discussion and the five-minute hate where people recite a list of manufactured transgressions.

Most people who say we should discuss politics more seem to mean that we should affirm the local viewpoint.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#630

Post by HexagonalKitten »

efwfwef wrote: post #44
Threeve303 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the hardcore believers from /r/The_Donald moved to Voat, I was happy that it was still possible for anyone to read what they were saying. Similar to a honeypot or sting operation, we are probably worse off when they scatter back to the shadows.

All in all, these people think as hard as us that they are right, that they are the better people, that they have the better ideologies. I just can't fathom it. I'm convinced at this point that the only way to think about it is to understand that the IQ average of that group must be pretty low.

I imagine that when you think yourself better than "them", you're thinking about mask-refusers, literal nazis, and (((dog whistlers))). And when they think of "you" they think of antifa druggies living in a park and burning down stores. We can't really demonize someone if they aren't a bit radical so we have to focus on the radicals.

What I'm trying to say is that the idiots you see probably are dumb enough to think they're geniuses, but there's a huge invisible support base (on all sides) of non-radicals who are fairly rational. And I think experience is the biggest difference between the groups. If you've seen a neighboring store burned you feel one way, if you've seen a neighbor threatened you feel another. The problem then is sharing experiences honestly so we can construct a mutual view of reality and then discuss the same issues.

Post reply on HN