About nine months ago this lifeboat came into existence following massive purges by Reddit admins against non-establishment conforming materials. Those purges never ended, which is why this particular forum has become the overall bastion for KIA2/GG materials.
On the creation of this site we were presented a set of 16 rules which we, the users, were questioned about. Overwhelming we found that the rules were overbearing and redundant.
Many of these rules are redundant, unnecessary, or bad.
The most obvious of which is that there are THREE rules covering NSFW/pornographic material. It was pointed out by myself as well as numerous other users that these were redundant and pointless, and the assumption was that these would be changed as the rules were simply temporary.
It's nine months on.
Those are only the most egregiously obvious.
The reason I make this post today is that our rules are so open-ended and confusing that even our illustrious mods have no idea WTF they mean.
I was personally banned for a day for a rule 15 violation after which u/DomitiusOfMassilia/ admitted he misunderstood what the rule meant. Immediately after I watched him make the same mistake with another. Now, a week after, I notice that the majority of action is taken under rules 2, 15, and 16. Almost all content removals are based on slurs/bad language/insults.
This post is largely upvoted while Dom's statement of removal is largely downvoted. That's just one example. This is becoming far too common. Please do not make the same mistakes that murdered KIA1.
Note that I am not calling out Dom specifically. I think the rules themselves are dogshit tier and must be fixed. I like this community, even if I do think you're a bunch of faggots. And goddamnit u/TheImpossible1 there's no women involved here so kindly fuck off.
Can we please have a serious discussion about our rules and the impacts that they have, and FIX THEM? We do not need SIXTEEN RULES, especially when it's clear not even our mods understand them all.
Rule 1 rewrite
I suppose I could make it clear that I am not referencing currently active active shooters, but people who are/have been active shooters who are rationalizing their shootings with a manifesto.
That is still some bullshit. If I wanted to talk about why the NZ guy did what he did why couldn't I post a first hand source? It may be full of memes and ultimately worthless, but it has some value and is worth discussion. I'm not saying go ahead and post the video, this isn't liveleak, but a bunch of words should be acceptable.
What if I posted excerpts of "Mein Kampf" not in celebration but for discussion?
Are you going to ban people who say "The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race" or any variants of that?
As I said to lgbtqwtfbbq, the biggest problem I saw here, especially at the time, was that it was being used not to simply slander a forum or a user, but to entirely deplatform websites as a whole.
No, despite it's presence in a manifesto, I don't think a generic statement about the concept of the Industrial Revolution itself should be removed. That's effectively an academic matter.
As I replied to AoV below:
And yet Kiwi Farms is still up. I'm sure you've seen the email.
From that thread: Imagine trying to ban a video that will let everyone know exactly what went down and how horrible it was. The video and manifesto turned the attack from a list of numbers and a title to the inner workings of a demented person who went out to kill innocents. People can only benefit from being able to access it.
I get wanting to keep the site up but giving in to demands that aren't even being made is just accepting defeat. Did the .win's admins ever say that couldn't be shared here? Are they filtering private messages like reddit does? If so it would be beneficial to everyone if that information was shared.
I wouldn't use Kiwi Farms as a example of websites being immune. Null is constantly embroiled in lawsuits from literally everywhere because of his refusal to take threads down. Right now he is in over 5 figures of court costs just from the two current ones, and he constantly has to do wacky fund raising to keep up (right now selling silver coins).
I get your point, but KF is in a special position where its run by one guy who owns his website and is willing to go to any extreme, including mega debt and ruining his own life (which he has), to keep it up. Which is a lot different than volunteer jannies.
I honestly don't remember. I'd have to ask.
I don't believe so.
Because that leads to websites being taken down. Pure and simple.
Sure, why not? This is mostly aimed at preventing people from murdering people in order to get their views to spread - at least, that is the rationale for the censorship.
Not sure how this is relevant, to be honest.
And yet Kiwi Farms is still up. I'm sure you've seen the email.
From that thread: Imagine trying to ban a video that will let everyone know exactly what went down and how horrible it was. The video and manifesto turned the attack from a list of numbers and a title to the inner workings of a demented person who went out to kill innocents. People can only benefit from being able to access it.
KF does its own hosting.
I don't care.
Would posting a link to Industrial Society and Its Future, originally published by the Washington Post, run afoul of this rule?
I'm unsure why that portion of the rule even needs to exist here: as I recall it was a response to reddit banning people for posting the Christchurch shooter's manifesto, but I fail to see why that needs to carry over to this site.
Let me do some research on Industrial Society and Its Future. I think I've seen that one before, but I'll have to double check.
The rule existed previously because there was a major push at the time, not just in regards to Reddit banning stuff, but it was genuinely being criminalized in UK, NZ, across Europe, and many IT companies in the US were taking whole sites down and removing their ability to be hosted.