I've created a list of rules as below, they will likely change later, but they are here for the purposes of establishing a base level of social order:
ONE: Do not post Illegal Activity. Also, do not post any manifesto's done by terrorists, active shooters, serial felons rationalizing such things, or promoting such things, even if your content does not endorse the message.
TWO: Do not engage in speech that promotes, advocates, glorifies, or endorses violence.
THREE: Do not threaten, harass, or bully users; and do not encourage others to do so on or off-line; nor make per se defamatory states at users.
FOUR: Do not post ISM. Involuntary Salacious Material means NSFW material of a manner that was not intentionally made public. This is the "upskirt", "revenge porn", and "private intimate photos" rule.
FIVE: Do not post Porn
SIX: Content that contains nudity, pornography, or profanity, which a reasonable viewer may not want to be seen accessing in a public or formal setting such as in a workplace should be tagged as NSFW. Any material of a titillating nature must be marked NSFW.
SEVEN: Do not post Facebook accounts, individuals who's twitters are less than 500 followers, private/personal information that is not publicly available, addresses, or participate, encourage, or engage in any doxxing campaign.
EIGHT: Do not intentionally deceive others by impersonating another. This does not apply to satire.
NINE: No person shall use communities.win sites (including kotakuinaction2.win) to solicit, facilitate any transaction, or gift including: ... ATF defined firearms or ammo as defined by the ATF, Bump-stock type devices, Explosives, 3D printing files to produce the aforementioned, controlled substances, Drugs, Alcohol, Tobacco, Stolen goods, Paid services involving physical sexual contact, Personal Information, Falsified Official Documents, Falsified Currency, Fraudulent Services, Pharmaceuticals
TEN: No vote manipulation. Do not break communities.win's features.
ELEVEN: Do not post spam. If you are self-advertising, you must have sufficiently engaged in the sub prior to your post, and you must engage with the users when they comment in your post. Spam will also include repeated messages and comments that are done with no effort to add to the conversation.
TWELVE: Do not post intentional falsehoods or hoaxes. Yes, the Elders of Zion and other such intentionally fabricated documents fall into this. If your POST is arguably false by the user-base, it may be marked as either misleading or unfounded based on it's factual assertions, particularly in the title.
THIRTEEN: If you have reposted something, it will be removed
FOURTEEN: Do not post more than 5 posts a day to this sub.
FIFTEEN: Do not direct particularly egregious identity based slurs at users. A list will be provided
SIXTEEN: Do not attack entire identity groups as inferior, subhuman, inherently morally deficient, biologically/evolutionary mongrel, or participating in a vast conspiracy to take over the world, ala ZOG-NWO / The Patriarchy.
I agree conditionally. We do need such a rule, but it might need some improvement so that it will only target demonstrable falsehoods. I've been on the receiving end of abusive Rule 7 removals on KafKiA far too often to believe otherwise.
But also keep in mind that it won't be enforced by giant idiots.
My interpretation: note that it talks only about talking about people as 'inferior'. This does not prevent talk about characteristics that one group may have that is better or worse than another group, whether it's blacks being better at basketball or average IQ scores of Koreans vs. white (or any other group).
"Group X has a lower average IQ" is OK.
"Group X is subhuman/inferior" is not.
This is absurd. Banning revenge porn does not 'shut down discussion'.
Perhaps it could be rephrased as 'illegal violence' or 'illegal acts'.
It might make us a target, so the mods definitely should have the discretion of banning manifestos.
Like I said, my issue here comes from bias and available information.
You look at things like the Trump-Russia conspiracy, Wuhan Coronavirus origin, or even just environmental issues and it's often split hard on "fact or fiction."
Something is probably wanted, it should just be something that's part of another overarching rule.
I agree with that idea, I just also think in that case it should be more considered to be part of a general harassment rule. Basically it's fine to criticize and argue, just don't be a massive dick about it.
I didn't say that to be about shutting down discussion, I'm just noting that those three rules are basically the same thing and all fit pretty snugly under the "No porn." rule. Why do we need three separate rules for that?
That'd be a good general rule. "Do not advocate for illegal activities."
I get that. There's been a lot of contention, especially after the NZ shooting where the government went crazy and went after a ton of sites and individuals for hosting the manifesto.
I just personally feel there's often merit in discussing what people claim leads them into committing such massive acts of violence.
Also I will never get tired of laughing at Randy Stair.
inhaaaaaaaaaaaaale
THE MODS ARE FAGS! FAAAAAGS!!!!
Exactly how egregious are these identity-based slurs (you forgot the hyphen, you illiterate twats) you speak of? I'm bi, and I don't give a shit about the word "fag" in normal use. I don't think I can define "normal use," but I can define unacceptable use:
good faith user, n. A person who games and doesn't want those games subsumed by Political Correctness, IdPol, or SJWism. (Or the Moral Majority, but I find it hard to believe they will try banning games anytime soon, what with America suffering an attempted Cultural Revolution.)
promotion of certain ideologies, n. Well, let's face it: a significant minority of our users are political freaks. I know a lot of KiA's Lefty users hate (what they think of as) capitalism enough that they would qualify as old-line Marxists. We also have a group who think Mussolini was a right-on dude, and even some who think "Uncle Adolf" was misunderstood.
Thanks to the origins of GamerGate, we tend not to have Commies. (Yes, we're about ethics in journalism, but let's face it, the ethical violations we were protesting were all coming from the Left. And yes, the mainstream media (MSM) donates 85–90% to Democrats, so them, too.) But we do have the latter. I do not want to ban them from the conversation. Also, I think tribalism is an important subject. (E.g., I'm not mad at Jar Jar Abrams for Star Trek or Star Wars. I'm mad that he portrayed the American military as murderers in Super 8, and I suspect very strongly that if I made a similar movie with a similar portrayal of the IDF, he would call me a Nazi.)
Now: I have seen some of the Nazi-posting (as opposed to satirical, 4chan-ish "swastika-posting") in KiA2. Their messages tend to follow a format (the actual content seems to be tailored to the individual receiver):
This style is attested by Vox Day's posting of The "Andrew Anglin" style guide:
I think once you see a few examples of the style, it should be very easy to distinguish the bad faith propagandizers from the few KiA2 oddballs who actually are "good faith users," loyal to the sub and its mission. I think it would help them to be among a motley crew who do believe in well-attested once-hidden groups with secret agendas and NDAs. (GameJournoPros, anyone?)
Say no more, you're an approved submitter now.
Same for me on both counts (it's amazing how many bifags there are in GG). But the admins have nuked comments calling people who weren't even on the site faggots...
Ugh. It's the same here?
What is the mothership of the .win sites?
Not here, I was talking about Reddit.
Hey how come you didn't get banned for saying "the mods are fags" when anyone who gets too upvoted for talking about jews gets censored and banned?
This begs the question: illegal where? Even just clarifying that we're not stuck being bound by California laws (or their "laws") would be a relief. You know the kind of bullshit I mean, like not being allowed to say negative things about polygamists or cuckolds.
Maybe I'm just too beat up from my time on reddit, but I reflexively recoil from what should be plain and normal regulations because I'm so accustomed to it being misinterpreted on purpose. I've seen how you and Dom act as mods, so I'm not very worried, but we may have caught a lot of refugees that aren't familiar with you two.
Wherever the powers that be can put enough pressure on the people making such decisions.
So Facebook bans anti-Islamic content in Pakistan, because Pakistan can pressure it to do that.
If you like those mods, you've never said anything factual about the Jews.
It just doesn't come up for me much - I came from 8/pol, so I've seen most of the ideas explored. From there, I started focusing on culture, rather than race or religion. I always assumed that behavior (which largely comes from culture) was the real meat of the issue, anyway.
I know what you mean, though - I catch it with other users occasionally. As much as I'd like a free speech forum, this can't be it. They're very hard to make publicly accessible. Feds/JIDF are a serious threat. I saw how they handled 9chan; they just posted a ridiculous threat towards jews on the politics board and reported it, conspicuously gaining the attention of groups strong enough to take the site down within the hour. Null, being a big retard, decided it was legit and he didn't want to defend it.
So I'll eat the occasional unwarranted deletion in exchange for having a place to talk at all. Dom and Ant don't hold the same position, but it's easy for me to agree with them that a certain degree of anti-jewish sentiment is dangerous. When it's a known and proven strategy, I have to concede that it's dangerous.
According to science, culture is not the driving factor in behavior, genes are:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioural_genetics#Additional_general_findings
Also IQ is 80% genetic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
Genes cause culture, not the other way around. That's why certain groups of people always tend toward the same culture, and other groups of people always tend toward a different culture.