this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
45 points (100.0% liked)
/kbin meta
3 readers
12 users here now
Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign
founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're misrepresenting the principle of the quote. The principle behind the quote concerns government restrictions on speech. Pretending that an instance of Kbin's moderation policies are somehow comparable to government suppression of speech is silly.
Using your own example. the government (in the USA) cannot bar the KKK from speaking and sharing their views. However, the rule that applies to the government does not apply to me. I am not required to offer the KKK a platform on my lawn, in my living room, or on my website, nor should I be.
I am not inclined to waste valuable time debating with racist fuck sticks, nor do I feel obligated to offer them a soapbox. If you feel that need, perhaps you should open your own instance to welcome them. Just don't expect most of the people who prefer their social media without bigots and racists to stop by.
You're confusing that "Voltaire" quote (which wasn't actually said by him) with the American First Amendment.
The American First Amendment is predicated on America's cultural basis in the principle of free speech, which is embodied by the quote. The American First Amendment indeed applies only to government, restricting its overreach. But the principle of free speech is one of the core principles of American culture. It goes far deeper than the First Amendment.
If you don't want to debate with them then don't subscribe to their magazine, and leave them alone.
I'm not confusing anything. The principle of the quote was concerning those who would apply force to prevent speech, not those who chose not to offer assholes a soapbox. But go on.
Please do point to the text that suggests that opening your living room up to people who want you dead so they can tell you so is a "core principle."
Or I can exercise my privilege as a user of this site and ask that @ernest remove the rules-violating magazine from the site.
I find it interesting that, at the heart of our differences, is a disagreement over the nature of the internet itself — whether it's public or private, more like a town square or more like our own living rooms. If you go back to the '90s, when the Web was nascent, I think technologists would have been surprised to learn that the issue is still so unsettled in 2023. I suppose it's a tough issue to settle. Ultimately, neither of our traditional notions of "public" and "private" fit it well.
We agree that people who want us dead should not be invited into our living rooms. My position is that by surfing kbin we are putting ourselves in the middle of a town square, and opening ourselves up to any and all perspectives, disagreeable as they may be. As an American, my sentiment is "bring it on."
The internet is public, go register a domain for hate speech, or "free speech" as some call it.
Websites are private property and do have moderation.
This would be true iff signups were by invitation only.
How would the first ammendment apply to a Polish website?
It wouldn't. At all. But the principle of free speech certainly does.