https://git.rip/users/sign_in

has very open tos

--
Posted on def2

well looks like that place is going be shutdown

--
Posted on def2

  To: Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

https://git.rip/users/sign_in

has very open tos

There is a strict non tolerance policy against any far right, fascist, bigoted, racist, abusive or otherwise hateful content. Posting any repositories with any such content or using profile pictures/user names matching these descriptions will result in an immediate ban from the platform.


Free but just like alot of other places make sure you're politics are in line.
--
Posted on RetroBBS
www.rocksolidbbs.com

2e8b0aac33e7ea20c2

Free but just like alot of other places make sure you're politics are in line.

fascist != politics

--
Posted on def2

Anonymous wrote:

2e8b0aac33e7ea20c2

Free but just like alot of other places make sure you're politics are in line.

fascist != politics

"far right, fascist, bigoted, racist, abusive or otherwise hateful content" these are all used politically to shut down opinion. The most extreme label is placed a lot of times on simple political viewpoints just to shut the other view down. And it works.
--
Posted on Rocksolid Light
news.novabbs.org

6547ab538f72a2d678

The most extreme label is placed a lot of times on simple political viewpoints just to shut the other view down. And it works.

I agree that this sort of thing happens. And I would say it must be discussed in these cases, in the hope to find a consensus, or else split ways.
And of course, each individual is free to make their own services, where they make their own rules.

--
Posted on def2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

2e8b0aac33e7ea20c2

Free but just like alot of other places make sure you're politics are in line.

fascist != politics

"far right, fascist, bigoted, racist, abusive or otherwise hateful content" these are all used politically to shut down opinion. The most extreme label is placed a lot of times on simple political viewpoints just to shut the other view down. And it works.

Fascists and other bigots are such tender, sensitive people. It must be awful feeling like you have to stop calling for torture and murder because people will think you're a bad person for it :(
Obviously the solution is to shut up people who have negative opinions of your violent, cruel "opinions" because they, not the ones bringing violence and abuse against them, are the real enemies of freeze peach.
--
Posted on Rocksolid Light
rslight.i2p

Mei wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

2e8b0aac33e7ea20c2

Free but just like alot of other places make sure you're politics are in line.

fascist != politics

"far right, fascist, bigoted, racist, abusive or otherwise hateful content" these are all used politically to shut down opinion. The most extreme label is placed a lot of times on simple political viewpoints just to shut the other view down. And it works.

Fascists and other bigots are such tender, sensitive people. It must be awful feeling like you have to stop calling for torture and murder because people will think you're a bad person for it :(
Obviously the solution is to shut up people who have negative opinions of your violent, cruel "opinions" because they, not the ones bringing violence and abuse against them, are the real enemies of freeze peach.

Yes exactly. The most extreme labels and extreme accusations, but not stating what basis you are using to call someone fascist, bigot, torturer, murderer, violent, cruel etc. This has been a great example of what you replied to.
--
Posted on Rocksolid Light
rslight.i2p

d32cc191c95c718c15

Yes exactly. The most extreme labels and extreme accusations, but not stating what basis you are using to call someone fascist, bigot, torturer, murderer, violent, cruel etc.

Well if somebody is calling for other peoples torture and murder, this would fit the description (and this _was_ described in the post).
This kind of content is not so difficult to find, especially on imageboards, with this one being an exception.

This has been a great example of what you replied to

No, it hasn't.

And what do you suggest as an alternative, anyway ? If you do not draw a line and exclude this kind of content, it will lead to an even more unfree situation.

--
Posted on def2

Anonymous wrote:

And what do you suggest as an alternative, anyway ? If you do not draw a line and exclude this kind of content, it will lead to an even more unfree situation.

There should be a line and I agree that if you promote violence you should be banned, but I think the line is way too far in the wrong place generally on popular boards like twitter and facebook.

If someone says women should have babies when they're young and put off their career until they're older and someone else says that all cis white males should be put out to sea to get them away from the rest of us, I don't think either one should be banned. One was, one was not. I don't agree with either opinion and don't think banning is a proper response.

What I see is that if someone says something like build the wall, he's called a fascist racist. The label doesn't fit the "crime". If someone posts "ACAB", it's ok whatever. People are being called fascist just to shut them down. I'm talking about people voicing opinions, not calling for violence.
--
Posted on Rocksolid Light
rslight.i2p

isn't github and gitlab free in clearnet too?

--
Posted on def2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And what do you suggest as an alternative, anyway ? If you do not draw a line and exclude this kind of content, it will lead to an even more unfree situation.

There should be a line and I agree that if you promote violence you should be banned, but I think the line is way too far in the wrong place generally on popular boards like twitter and facebook.

If someone says women should have babies when they're young and put off their career until they're older and someone else says that all cis white males should be put out to sea to get them away from the rest of us, I don't think either one should be banned. One was, one was not. I don't agree with either opinion and don't think banning is a proper response.

What I see is that if someone says something like build the wall, he's called a fascist racist. The label doesn't fit the "crime". If someone posts "ACAB", it's ok whatever. People are being called fascist just to shut them down. I'm talking about people voicing opinions, not calling for violence.

That is fascist and racist, though. You can say there is some valid reason to want to spend a shitload of money to build a symbol of racism against people who largely came into the country legally anyway https://www.npr.org/2019/01/10/683662691/where-does-illegal-immigration-mostly-occur-heres-what-the-data-tell-us?t=1612561733700 interestingly also points out that there already are walls) and have been in the US for over a decade https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/12/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/ interestingly also points out that the unauthorized immigrant total was falling even before the orange fascist guy was elected). You can say the sky isn't "blue" but actually a combination of different colors at different times. That's all bullshit word games, though. "The wall" is a symbol of hate. The "opinion" is that you gotta keep the browns out because they drag down your precious white country. You don't have to explicitly "call" for violence to produce violence and literally shooting people is not the only kind of violence people suffer.

People are not getting banned over mere accusations of such things or since fascists and racists decided to say their accusers are the real fascists and racists there wouldn't be anyone left on those sites. I imagine everyone agrees that corporate moderation is poor at best but it's baffling to me that freeze peach warriors think they're the ones being abused because sometimes people say they're racist just because they keep saying racist things. Are you trying to say that gets people banned or are you mixing getting banned from Twitter with getting upset at being called a racist? Why are so few of the racists and fascists gone if all it takes is an accusation? I think it's because you're being seriously dishonest (or wrong, probably through getting all of your news from fascists who play victim all the time) about what gets right-wingers banned and how often. Kinda sounds like you'd say it's because the major clearnet services are run by far-left Democrats (raucous laughter) and totally don't support huge amounts of every kind of bigotry except for persecuting all the poor, defenseless white guys who want to talk about their "opinion" that ethnic (or some other kind of) "purity" is the best thing for the US.

On second thought, it's unlikely this is going to be read sensibly by someone who thinks "build the wall" is something a reasonable person might say and doesn't cause any problems for anybody. Clearly you "disagree" that there's any path from "get the browns outta our precious white country!" to "use bullets to get the browns outta our precious white country!" Maybe you just "think" that everything up to people being killed is fine and the killing itself comes from nowhere? I refer to killing again because I don't think you acknowledge any other form of harm. If you want to explain how white supremacy, for instance, doesn't itself contribute to social and economic disparity between racial groups then feel free.

Just out of curiosity, would you say there's any precedent for or likelihood of cishet white guys being thrown out of any place larger than maybe one building? Maybe I'm leaning a little on the common response but it seems like racism gets a lot more done than "toss the cishet white guys into the ocean," which as far as I'm aware has, unlike violence and harassment against minority groups, never actually happened and is highly unlikely to. You see, that will never happen and your beloved white guys have nothing to fear. Families currently or recently being thrown out after being in the US for generations have a lot to fear.

Since I apparently have nothing better to do than argue on some random forum that seems to have more fash and morons wanting to make bombs or hack somebody's Twitter than sensible political discourse, I'd also like to question how much of what gets people banned is really "voicing opinions" in appropriate places as opposed to harassing people and how much is PR bullshit as a show of "fairness"  that changes as little as possible and will likely be reversed anyway.
--
Posted on Rocksolid Light
rslight.i2p

e5bd896181a93a2a6d

You don't have to explicitly "call" for violence to produce violence and literally shooting people is not the only kind of violence people suffer.

That.

There is also another point I find important here: the discussion so far has been about private platforms like Facebook and Twitter and the like. And for these the owners decide about what is acceptable and what is not, this is how private ownership works. Don't like it ? You are free to quit and make your own service....

--
Posted on def2

Anonymous wrote:

e5bd896181a93a2a6d

You don't have to explicitly "call" for violence to produce violence and literally shooting people is not the only kind of violence people suffer.

That.

There is also another point I find important here: the discussion so far has been about private platforms like Facebook and Twitter and the like. And for these the owners decide about what is acceptable and what is not, this is how private ownership works. Don't like it ? You are free to quit and make your own service....

I struggle with the difference between fb/twitter being private and can do what they want, which I agree with, but some baker is required to make a cake he doesn't want to. Maybe I'm wrong, but why is this different?
--
Posted on novaBBS