Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

buzz wrote

eh, having a vetting system in postmill would be useful for creating safe spaces for communities that want it.


ziq OP wrote

isn't that what mods are for?


buzz wrote (edited )

yes ~~~ but a vetting system would serve as an additional tool for moderators:

a) creating a barrier to entry for a group, that would support intended discussion (e.g. if you have a forum on post-coloniality or racial issues, having a questionnaire that requires respondents to speak about performative behavior and reverse racism)

b) reduce the moderator load in removing shitty posts by limiting the amount of people who make shitty posts (requiring labor to join a group and post shit), and hence prevent the need for a community to engage in that.

is this authoritarian? yes probably, but the existence of mods are anyway (and can be made transparent with the moderator log). It would also create a time delay and also increase moderator loads in the short term.


ziq OP wrote (edited )

Raddle already has an extremely high barrier of entry just because of how eloquent, thoughtful and well-read its users are; making most newcomers too intimidated to join in. That's the praxis version of an entry barrier - set high standards with a high level of discourse. Then the right people will work to improve their politics (and their personality) before participating much.

Making people take an exam before they can get in is just gatekeeping and assumes there's only one 'correct' answer to questions; which is incredibly short-sighted.


Also, raddle moderators aren't here to remove 'shitty posts' - just commercial spam and other terms of service violations. The users downvote shitty posts for quality control. Just click /controversial if you want to see a sea of shit.

What are you politics, out of curiosity?


buzz wrote

  • I mean shitty posts as in fashy posts.
  • I am only suggesting this in the context of postmill, and not that of raddle per-say, as a means for communities from facebook, discord, and other not nice places to have better options, that use a vetting system.
  • I agree with you that Raddle does have a high barrier of entry naturally and that is good
  • as we are speaking hypothetically, your speculation of its nature is valid, [some text here that speaks to my idea of questions as not really one-sided, or the issue of one-sidedness not being an issue when it comes to fundamentals that might concern a group]

I am an anti-capitalist (except I am kinda fine with market-socialism to an extent xaxa). I really haven't solidified on a certain school of thought, and I think there are different approaches that need to be taken within different contexts to achieve liberation.


Fossidarity wrote

Fashy posts are against the ToS so that shouldn't be a problem.


F_x wrote


  1. As ziq pointed out, mods are there for that.

  2. People that want to learn won't be able to access because they won't know how to answer.

  3. You can have a private channel on matrix.


A better registration system for raddle would be nice and fix the bots and shitty users problem. Limiting comments and votes like the already existing limit on thread until one gets approved.