There is a general tendency on the internet that any forum that promotes free speech and only moderates spam and illegal posts, but does not remove posts based on their content, becomes majority right wing after some time. There are left-wing forums with censorship, and there are right-wing forums with censorship, of course. But if you let people discuss their ideas freely without interference, the mostly tend to become right-wing. It seems that without censorship and content-based moderation artificially steering discussion left-wing ideas cannot exist.
I think you could translate this to: “forums that don’t moderate toxic content frequently devolve into alt-right cesspools”
“free speech” is a red-herring, nobody actually wants totally free speech. When you say “only moderates spam and illegal posts” you’re admitting that these forums don’t have absolute free speech. What you’re really saying is “sites that cater to the alt-right tend to become alt-right”. Thats not much of an argument.
Here you say “mostly” where the title you say “inevitably”. these are not the same arguments. You should cite some sources because you could be suffering from confirmation bias.
They’re only cesspools to you, because people with different opinions than you are free to voice them. This suggests that you only really want to read stuff that you already agree with.
My point is that there are no bastions of free speech, you just think there are because they host the things you want to hear.
That’s a common piece of misinformation that tries to make it seem as though everyone is as biased as those who employ censorship, which is not true. I have been a part of communities with incredible diversity of opinions where the only moderation was removing automated spam and other destructive participants. No, that does not mean censorship, because they never deleted posts because of opinions or facts they presented. It really is possible to have discussion forums with free speech, although many that attempt are relentlessly attacked on all possible fronts until they cave in and start censoring.
One mans “destructive participant” is another mans truthsayer
No, not really, that’s just another lie. There is no “truthsaying” in automated spam advertising herbal viagra, that’s something devoid of content. It’s absurd to claim that constitutes censorship and you’re doing this only to attempt to classify everyone as employing censorship, which is disingenuous of you.
show me the forum with free speech
Kiwifarms
Kiwifarms is a very biased case. It’s based, at the start, about harassing ‘lolcows’ for kicks (usually people with learning disabilities like Chris-Chan). Furthermore, it is often seen as a haven for people who get banned from other more moderate sites.
Would you agree that this inherently attracts a more edgy and “right-wing” audience?
from wikipedia:
Wow, that’s quite the bastion of free speech. I bet if someone doxxed the owner the thread would get deleted lol
You can moderate some communities and others can be less moderated. Some people like cess pools.
I mean, what even is the alt-right?
As far as I can tell it’s just a carry-all slur for anybody who disagrees with whatever the corporate establishment media has told us is important this week.
It’s a little bit sad, but seems like the smartest thing that those who absolutely refuse to allow any changes to the status quo ever did was enlist a bunch of people who lack critical thinking skills into an army of pro-establishment hacks who somehow think that they’re “fighting the power” by standing up for the rights of Coca-Cola or general electric.