Now there’s a term for platforms that turn into Nazi and far-right echo chambers, “Voatification”. It’s really useful for describing a common phenomenon. Funny also how Parler’s founder intended to create the platform for everyone, not just Pro-Trump people but now it’s just full of them.
Parler seems dubious for several reasons:
in order to send private messages, get a verified badge or respond with images or links, you have to send a picture of your ID
messages can be removed or users can be banned for any reason at all - even if the users are following the rules
users are asked to step in and volunteer as unpaid moderators for filtering spam
there are no blue checkmarks like in Twitter but “Verified influencers” who are promoted even more and whose content is promoted in the platform’s “Discover” section
And these rules, doesn’t look like absolute freedom of speech for those who want it.
Avoiding Voatification is really hard. The problem is that whatever platform you’re providing an alternative to is still there, and if the only difference between you and them is censorship, then all the non-extremists will stay on the big site, because that’s where their friends are, and you just get left with the dregs.
The only think I can think of that might work is to have another major selling point besides the laissez-faire stuff, like an emphasis on security, or no/limited advertising, or better UI. Even then, it would be an uphill battle.
It’s too bad, because I think having some sort of “let all voices be heard” type of platform could be a good thing, assuming you can get some sensible people to use it.
users are asked to step in and volunteer as unpaid moderators for filtering spam
This is interesting. Have you had a chance to look at how it works? I’ve seen people saying that moderation is in fact done by volunteers who vote on reported content (if 4 people out of 5 decide the content is not legit, it is removed or hidden), but I’m curious about how it works: what do these people get to vote on? Can they vote on any post, or they have some kind of queue of reports to review? How are these people chosen? Do you get, like, a request from Parler to help them out with moderation or is it based on some sort of karma score? Or maybe they just voluntarily apply? Or maybe it’s just contextual and when a post gets marked as reported, the first 5 people to vote will decide its faith?
does anyone know a good “best of parler” thing to follow to see screenshots? i don’t want to give them more active user stats, but I’m terribly curious
r/ParlerWatch is probably what you’re looking for, although I do not suggest you to go there. I hate to be reminded the level of toxicity the right can reach when given an unmoderated platform to vent in
I’m describing the exact opposite of this Lemmy instance. This is one of the very few smaller networks that doesn’t rave on about protecting your “free speech”, and the moderators will have your ass handed to you, if you start misbehaving.
For example, by creating an account on a small network just to complain about that network – what the fuck are you doing here, if you don’t like the moderation? You could be on goddamn Reddit, of all places, and experience less strict moderation.
Ah yes, 2020’s Gab/Voat. I wanted to try it out to see how its “frontpage” looked like, but it requires a phone number. No thanks
Now there’s a term for platforms that turn into Nazi and far-right echo chambers, “Voatification”. It’s really useful for describing a common phenomenon. Funny also how Parler’s founder intended to create the platform for everyone, not just Pro-Trump people but now it’s just full of them.
Parler seems dubious for several reasons:
And these rules, doesn’t look like absolute freedom of speech for those who want it.
Avoiding Voatification is really hard. The problem is that whatever platform you’re providing an alternative to is still there, and if the only difference between you and them is censorship, then all the non-extremists will stay on the big site, because that’s where their friends are, and you just get left with the dregs.
The only think I can think of that might work is to have another major selling point besides the laissez-faire stuff, like an emphasis on security, or no/limited advertising, or better UI. Even then, it would be an uphill battle.
It’s too bad, because I think having some sort of “let all voices be heard” type of platform could be a good thing, assuming you can get some sensible people to use it.
This is interesting. Have you had a chance to look at how it works? I’ve seen people saying that moderation is in fact done by volunteers who vote on reported content (if 4 people out of 5 decide the content is not legit, it is removed or hidden), but I’m curious about how it works: what do these people get to vote on? Can they vote on any post, or they have some kind of queue of reports to review? How are these people chosen? Do you get, like, a request from Parler to help them out with moderation or is it based on some sort of karma score? Or maybe they just voluntarily apply? Or maybe it’s just contextual and when a post gets marked as reported, the first 5 people to vote will decide its faith?
does anyone know a good “best of parler” thing to follow to see screenshots? i don’t want to give them more active user stats, but I’m terribly curious
r/ParlerWatch is probably what you’re looking for, although I do not suggest you to go there. I hate to be reminded the level of toxicity the right can reach when given an unmoderated platform to vent in
thanks!!
Yeah, it’s the usual cycle:
It sounds like you’re describing this Lemmy instance.
I’m describing the exact opposite of this Lemmy instance. This is one of the very few smaller networks that doesn’t rave on about protecting your “free speech”, and the moderators will have your ass handed to you, if you start misbehaving.
For example, by creating an account on a small network just to complain about that network – what the fuck are you doing here, if you don’t like the moderation? You could be on goddamn Reddit, of all places, and experience less strict moderation.
deleted by creator