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

631–640 of 671 posts

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#631

Post by HexagonalKitten »

efwfwef wrote: post #257
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EQ, not IQ. So much of right-wing politics is predicated in lacking empathy for others.

I think it's both, it's not just an empathy thing because they do have empathy: but only for their family, their neighbors of colors, etc. It's more selective sure, but it's still empathy.

I've seen conservatives say they feel (have empathy) for the women in Jacob Blake's life, and the children, but not for Jacob himself. Or at least not since he became an adult and chose to perpetuate the cycle.

I think it's more complex than that all (or even most) republicans are racist.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#632

Post by read_if_gay_ »

cable2600 wrote: post #165
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…

The alt-right needs to go somewhere to leave the rest of us alone. No matter what they will blame liberals for the loss of Voat and other sites. When you have no censorship it is like the Wild West and the biggest guns rule. Back when I worked as a CO-SYSOP for a College run BBS I had to delete posts that had cuss words in them or were hateful or porno. They had to keep the subboards clean because we had 13 year olds…

> The alt-right needs to go somewhere to leave the rest of us alone.

Hmm, I wonder why the political divide has grown to become such a huge problem in the US...

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#633

Post by concordDance »

ngcazz wrote: post #557
concordDance wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find these types of strawman confusing. It's obvious to anyone who reads them that it doesn't even slightly relate to what anyone here has said (not letting someone participate in sporting events where they have a biological advantage is not exactly calling them pigs) but people post them anyway. Is there some sort of costly signalling of membership of some social group (woke group?) going on?

Simple, I like to be solidaristic and find the _need_ per se to discuss those topics antagonistic to solidarity. I'm not signalling my virtue, but then again, you're free to call my attitude whatever you want, it just demonstrates our values are entirely distinct.

Problem is you end up forming a link in people's minds between views like yours and strawmen, causing distrust of people like you which will damage your cause.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#634

Post by read_if_gay_ »

rchaud wrote: post #606
sgillen wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, voat was a community founded and populated by all the people banned or unwelcome by mainstream platforms. I don’t think it follows that Reddit would become as bad a voat if it was “all free speech all the time”.

> I don’t think it follows that Reddit would become as bad a voat if it was “all free speech all the time”. Do you remember r/uncensored_news, a sub that sprang up in the wake of the Miami Pulse nightclub shooting? Apparently its raison d'etre was to show people "the truth" because r/news moderators were not approving the numerous news posts about it fast enough. Unsurprsingly, that was considered censorship. It took…

But the same issue applies for that sub. Because the mainstream place pushed them out, all the deplorables end up on the next best alternative.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#635

Post by yakireev »

pstuart wrote: post #579
yakireev wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go to /r/all and try to find the first pro-T. post and the first "orange man bad" post. If you don't find any pro-T. posts quickly, then this is your example. We know from the election results that about half of the U.S. voters prefer R. party or T. in particular. This is a lot - this can't be a fringe group by definition of "fringe". In 2016, scrolling through reddit you could see it. There was a contested election,…

I need to tread carefully here, but this is the kind of political discussion that HN doesn't want . I'm interested in discussing policy, and the application of same. Tribal warfare politics is ugly and uninteresting. Are you religious? Shall I try to talk you out of your faith? Because that's what discussing T is to his followers. From my vantage point (and I'm not alone in this), it's both fascinating and horrifying…

> Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard?

Maybe. Or maybe not. How do I know?

Not reddit, but I bookmarked this example a few years ago. It is a very little thing, but very showing. Remember when T. was trying to negotiate some deal with North Korea? One of the things which came out of it was DPRK returning some remnants of U.S. soldiers from the Korean war back to the U.S.

I consider the New Yorker to be one of the best pieces of journalism which the U.S. has to offer (no irony here). Here are two articles from there: one is about that story, the remnants of soldiers coming back, another one is about Diet Coke. They were on the front page of their website on the same day, and I clicked both.

1: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/waiting-for-a-box-o...

2: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-decli...

One of them mentions T, another one does not. Can you guess which one? Can you guess whether it is a "positive" mention?

So, now back to your question:

> Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard?

Maybe. Or maybe not. How do I know? I'm not from the U.S., but I guess that you are, so you tell me.

For now, I can tell you that I lost a lot of trust in the U.S. media, but maybe you can change my mind. I'm not a T. follower, so (according to you) there might be a possibility of a dialog.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#636

Post by read_if_gay_ »

Tade0 wrote: post #438

You guys crack me up, even now you accuse me of being mossad or a honey pot. If I keep it up or shut it down I'm the same thing. Damned if you do, damned it you don't. I think nothing sums ups this community better.

This is every community ever. There are always haters.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#637

Post by theelous3 »

renewiltord wrote: post #548
theelous3 wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not remotely like sending your children to a bad school. It's more like living in an actual city where the streets are lined with the guy from that change my view meme: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/steven-crowders-change-my-min... You can just walk right past them. You are only subjected to them insofar as their existence is recognisable, but no more than you wish to engage. Personally, I'm happy to engage…

Oh, you can live in that city if you want. It turns out the majority of us would just rather up sticks and move, until it's just you missionaries and your Klan / Nazi / Fascist broken people you're trying to fix. I think it's all very noble and all that, but if someone invited me to a party and was all like "Oh yeah, man, and we're going to convert all these Klan dudes to be good people" I'm going to be like "Okay, y…

I mean, it's also not like a weird debate party either. To stretch more analogies, it's like a building hosting permanent parties for every group, and you can go to any of them you like. Just don't go to the nazi party party. Easy.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#638

Post by shemtay »

lordCarbonFiber wrote: post #104
sfblah wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give some specifics of #3 just for color? I'm not interested in debating or trolling at all. I'm just curious what people say that does this. Is it just people cheering for Trump or something?

Tones of statements fall under that header. It can be Trump supporters tallking about election fraud, nazis talking about "race based IQ distributions" or transphobes talking about "bathroom predators"; there's no shortage of these kind of bad faith low effort "arguements". There are mountains of high quality sources you can use to argue against the claims but it takes many times the work than just showing up to "jus…

Your examples are very revealing of a larger problem.

Not only are these viewpoints, which you claim can only be argued in bad faith, supported by empirical evidence, but the people who dare to support them publicly are risking social and financial ruin. If "unsafe" and "marginalized" do not describe their situation, then the words have no meaning.

As a minority from one of the groups at the unflattering end of the crime rate distributions, it is my lived experience that the type of censorship you are advocating for is what makes me feel unsafe.

Inconvenient empirical truths about my community can not be discussed in the sort of polite and caring settings where the seeds of real solutions that don't ignore reality could germinate.

Instead, they can only be discussed in rude and hateful settings.

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#639

Post by jl2718 »

kypro wrote: post #433

Voat and Bitchute are the platforms that convinced me censorship just radicalises people more. I tried to use Voat a number of times after the subreddits and communties I liked online were censored one by one, but each time this happened I noticed Voat got progressively more extremist as it started to become one of the last places that allowed that type of speech on the internet. While I never felt I needed to use Vo…

> exposing myself to content ... shift views

How is this a concern if you know your views are correct to begin with?

Re: Voat Is Shutting Down

#640

Post by renewiltord »

theelous3 wrote: post #637
renewiltord wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, you can live in that city if you want. It turns out the majority of us would just rather up sticks and move, until it's just you missionaries and your Klan / Nazi / Fascist broken people you're trying to fix. I think it's all very noble and all that, but if someone invited me to a party and was all like "Oh yeah, man, and we're going to convert all these Klan dudes to be good people" I'm going to be like "Okay, y…

I mean, it's also not like a weird debate party either. To stretch more analogies, it's like a building hosting permanent parties for every group, and you can go to any of them you like. Just don't go to the nazi party party. Easy.

Oh yeah, that's actually what I like about the Internet. In general, communities stay isolated. The problem with the guys on Reddit is that they'd leak out. I'd be sitting there enjoying my photos of San Francisco when suddenly, out of nowhere, bam! "(((Chesa Boudin))), Jew Extraordinaire, son of Weather Underground Illuminati will stick you full of Israeli heroin and marry your daughter off to a homeless guy who kills police wives". Yeah, no thanks. Back in the box, you go, mate. Back. In. The. Box. Fortunately, Reddit goes after the big hives of these people, and when that's done they actually just go away to their own community, with blackjack and hookers, yelling all the way about free speech.

It turns out just discouraging them from having an SSO that lets them go to the other parties is enough to get them to leave you alone.

Post reply on HN