Comment by jakelazaroff
3 years ago
I don’t know why we insist on pretending that there’s no way to figure out what counts as “hate speech” or “glorifying violence”. If you look on any social network you’ll find you can report people for saying things that clearly fall under those categories. Like if you’re calling someone a slur, or threatening them, or telling them to kill themselves, those are all pretty clearly out of bounds!
And, I mean, to be clear: there will always be weaselly “oh-but-I-didnt-technically-break-the rules” comments like that Donald Trump tweet. But the whole point of this is that you’ll never be able to make a rule with an objective definition! These are not mathematically defined sets; someone will always need to make a judgment call.
> I don’t know why we insist on pretending that there’s no way to figure out what counts as “hate speech” or “glorifying violence”.
what if this was a forum that rebels to the gov't are using to discuss how they will form the revolution? Is that now disallowed, because what they discuss could be considered hate speech?
What if this group of rebels (or freedom fighters as they call it) is someone you personally want to support?
What if this group are labeled terrorists by other governments?
It's not so black and white tbh. It's only black and white when you imagine yourself to be the authority.
I mean, yeah, that’s kind of my entire point. None of it is black and white and that’s okay!
On many social networks, something like “kill all white people” wouldn't be considered hate speech.
Can you not with the victimhood mentality? There isn’t a single major social network — let alone many — on which explicitly calling for genocide does not run afoul of the moderation policy, and we both know it.