Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ziq admin wrote

whitelisted you for speaking the truth

32

Tequila_Wolf admin wrote

Yeah.

What's not allowed is listed in the w/terms_of_service:

Content is prohibited if it

Promotes white supremacy, queerphobia, transphobia, misogyny, classism, ableism, body shaming, antisemitism, Islamophobia, colonialism or age discrimination.

Sexualizes minors or promotes adults having sex with minors.

Trivializes or makes light of rape.

Apologizes for police or military brutality, imperialism, eugenics, genocide.

Apologizes for violence towards children. Is a pornographic image/video (however, nudity is permitted if it's non-pornographic)

22

[deleted] wrote

10

flipshod wrote

All rules about something as complex as speech have to be purposefully vague and generalized.

We have to rely on people to make judgment calls. Large swaths of the law are based.on this concept.

Looking at the set of rules as a whole gives you an idea of the spirit and intent of the rulemakers (and thus the people making the judgment calls) and here, I would bet that criticizing Israel's treatment of Palestenians won't fall under anti-semitism.

13

[deleted] wrote

10

toocats wrote

The difference between here and Reddit is that here, if you violate the TOS, first, you're generally called out on it and asked to change or remove whatever it was you said (unless it was blatantly in violation). If you're not sure why it violates the TOS, or if you feel what you said wasn't actually prohibited, you can ask questions or make your case to the mods/admins and to other community members. The mods/admins here are fairly reasonable but at the same time effective; if that were to become no longer the case, I'd hope that the community members would address that. That said, while this is an online community of anarchists and other radicals, it's also a website that an individual owns and pays for FWIW.

7

[deleted] wrote

4

ziq wrote (edited )

Have you seen the w/defining_our_terms wiki that's linked in the tos? Could you be more specific about how the definitions of the terms in questions could be improved? We put out a call for people affected by each form of oppression to write each definition at the time but in the end I think only 2 people contributed to that wiki, so the definitions could be expanded.

4

marx wrote

Why not just add "(criticism of Israeli policy is okay)" after antisemitism? Six words could solve the problem.

By the way is there any chance of the restrictions on porn ever being removed or an alternative NSFW site being established? An explicitly anti-bigotry space for sex workers could be really popular.

5

ziq wrote

Why not just add "(criticism of Israeli policy is okay)" after antisemitism? Six words could solve the problem.

I think this would work.

By the way is there any chance of the restrictions on porn ever being removed or an alternative NSFW site being established?

There was a discussion recently in f/meta about that and the consensus was that it's not worth the trouble and if sex workers wanted that, they would just make their own platform instead of coming to a overtly political one.

3

marx wrote

There was a discussion recently in f/meta about that and the consensus was that it's not worth the trouble and if sex workers wanted that, they would just make their own platform instead of coming to a overtly political one.

That sucks, though I understand as porn cuts you off from a significant amount of financial infrastructure. I would say that sex work is inherently political nowadays though. Sex workers are often disprivileged people without the means to create their own spaces too, particularly digital ones that require heavy investments.

4

Ganggang wrote

What trouble is it at all, I don’t understand. Just don’t ban people for posting porn lmao

3

bloodrose wrote

All porn? Should no lines be drawn? What about rape? Reddit has a lot of rape porn posted. If we draw the line at rape, then a mod has to go and watch the porn and make sure there is no rape porn. If we draw that line, should we draw a line that says no exploitative porn? Again, a mod has to go and view that to figure it out what is and is not exploitative.

4

Ganggang wrote (edited )

I mean I don’t know there can be some common sense applied here. Anything consensual though I feel like is fine, if you don’t like it don’t watch it. I mean I’m not planning on watching porn here anyways lol but it is silly to moderate and feels weird and moralist.

I’m open to discussing more precise rules, but anything consensual sounds good to me. If it’s cringe that’s what the downvoted button is for.

1

[deleted] wrote

1

marx wrote

To allow them to fully participate how they'd like, yes.

3

[deleted] wrote

1

marx wrote

Most sex workers nowadays produce pornographic content. If it's not allowed, then that's basically a major part of their identity and a major if not the primary part of their labor production that's prohibited, closed off, made lesser than and taboo.

Now don't get me wrong. I don't think that the admins here have banned porn out of any sort of anti-sex worker bias. I doubt most sex workers think that. I'm sure they understand the reasons, what with how allowing porn makes hosting more difficult and whatnot. But it still sucks and is hurtful, same as it is to have any other part of you shut out.

Even if you're put in a position where you feel compelled to go along with oppression (again hosting issues for pornographic websits, etc.), and even if it's hard to blame you, the oppression is still being perpetuated.

Imagine the opposite, a porn site where any left-wing political talk is immediately shut down and silenced. Sure, they can say "Well it's just a porn site. Go somewhere else for your politics." and maybe there's some logic to that, but wouldn't you still feel put out a bit if you checked the rules and saw a rule straight up like "Marxism and anti-racism are banned."?

Again, I respect the admins here for doing their best under constraints to create an inclusive space. I don't think that their stance is indicative of any sort of bias. But, fact is, it simply can't be a perfectly inclusive platform if the labor of sex workers is deemed unfit for platforming.

An architect can post a house they built here, a game dev can post a game they made here, and an artist can post their paintings here, but one group (that's already seriously marginalized, including often even on the left, especially when they're trans or PoC) is left out, with the products of their labor specifically called out in the rules as forbidden.

It's exclusionary. I get it. But it's exclusionary and I have no reason to believe that it's not upsetting for those excluded.

7

[deleted] wrote

2

ziq wrote

Added this to defining our terms, will work on eugenics next but that's much trickier:

It should go without saying that critiquing the colonialist settler-state of Israel and its continuing atrocities against the Palestinian people does not qualify as antisemitism.

In the future you should make proposals for sitewide changes in f/meta where everyone can weigh in.

if the only folks enforcing the rules are admins

If you check the global moderation log, it's not just the site admins who are applying the rules, it's the mods of each individual forum too. The log provides full transparency for users so every mod is able to be held accountable. Every mod who has abused their power was demodded for it.

3

flipshod wrote

Yeah, somehow yesterday I was permanently banned from r/communism. Some bot went through my post history and determined that I was a "reactionary" which is ludicrous.

I responded that I had been reading theory since before the moderators were born and am awaiting a response.

3

bloodrose wrote

What I do think we need is a serious and ongoing conversation about the intricacies of rule enforcement.

This is common here on raddle. It has occurred before and will occur again. We usually take these conversation to /f/meta.

3

ItsABad wrote

are cops protected by that rule because of their jew star sheriff badges?

−14

TapoChapHouse wrote

Actually sensible rules unlike the place which should not be named.

8

ziq wrote

Reddit rules:

  1. No shaming slave owners.

  2. Respect our advertisers (they literally banned an anti-advertiser sub)

  3. Both sides are extreme and need to be silenced

  4. No drawings of molotov cocktails (an anarchist mod got banned for approving a link to a pdf that had a molotov drawing on like page 300).

13

celebratedrecluse wrote

indeed, so unfortunately the meme may lose some of its appeal due to the lack of transgressiveness.

raddle has a more implied "kill slave owners" policy, nobody will argue against you except our dedicated team of professional trolls who consistently post 0-3/10 bait

11

TTemp wrote

Death to the entire bourgeois class and their die-hard lackeys. I want nothing more than to see their mother fucking heads on pikes by the end of my life (not in minecraft)

Damn it feels good to speak uninhibited

10

DasRav wrote

Kill them in minecraft and while they are reeling do it for real. The double tap!

7

suma wrote

Next reddit will ban anyone that says they like the movie Django.

6

masquerademinutes wrote

bitch there is a subforum for illegal activities here; impossible on reddit. and by illegal I don't mean "yarr i'm a pirate lol"

1