top 100 commentsshow all 129

[–][deleted]  (47 children)


    [–][deleted] 13 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 3 fun -  (43 children)

    There is literally no reason to complain now... besides being oversensitive that is

    [–]FediNetizen 12 insightful - 5 fun12 insightful - 4 fun13 insightful - 5 fun -  (42 children)

    No, there's still plenty of reasons to complain, because the original problem still stands. This is a good tool to have (good for both the racists and the spammers), but the types of "fuck jews" content you see on the frontpage is a turnoff to most people, and the people that post that content themselves also tend to be pretty wound up as well. I had one guy tell me to "post nose" because my anti-racism was apparently "typical jew behavior". I had another guy call me a niggerfaggot because I disagreed with a guy who said BLM was the modern KKK.

    It's not feasible to tell a new user to just start blocking every racist with the hopes that eventually they'll stop. Why join the site at that point when there are many other social media sites available that don't have this problem? The people for which there is a good answer to this question will tend to be the people for whom this isn't even a problem.

    [–]Extract 15 insightful - 3 fun15 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 3 fun -  (29 children)

    I'm not defending some of the blatant antisemitism around here, but...

    Why join the site at that point when there are many other social media sites available that don't have this problem?

    Because some people are smart enough to realize that those problems would exist in any free-speech board, as long as antisemitism exists?
    Those who fail to understand this are free to go back to their safe spaces - oh, wait, many of those who come here do so because they got kicked out of those spaces.

    Others come here because, despite having some antisemites and a few total loonies, there is a large rational majority, much bigger than any other place that's free speech (excluding maybe

    [–]FediNetizen 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (27 children)

    Because some people are smart enough to realize that those problems would exist in any free-speech board, as long as antisemitism exists?

    Obviously anti-semitism exists. So does sexuality, and violent thoughts, etc. We have good ways to deal with that content: mark it sensitive. You can host that type of content but make it opt-in because you recognize it's sensitive and not appropriate for all contexts.

    I would say expressions of sexuality are as valid as any other. The only exceptions are where they encourage harm (pedophilia, rape, etc). Obviously, you would disagree, which is funny because you readily accept both Saidit and Gab as free speech boards, despite both banning porn.

    Why do you readily accept the outright ban of sexual expression, but insist that genuine racism must be shown on /s/all or else this isn't a free speech board? Why can't we accept that some topics are sensitive and should be opt-in rather than default?

    [–]Jesus 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (18 children)

    According to Trump, Dershowitz and the Likudniks including its leader Netanyahu (whom are all anti-Semitic against Palestinians), their actions encouraging and signing unconstitutional laws that deem anti-Israeli, anti-Judaism (meaning being against Talmudism or other Jewish supremacist religions), anti-Zionism statements, are all forms of anti-Semitism.

    Ashkanazi Jews are not semitic, so where is the anti-Semitism? That's right, it's criticism. That's it. Criticizing Zionism, criticizing Israel, criticizing its government or Jewish supremacism or Jewish terrorist groups like the Stern Gang, Likud or Irgun is NOT anti-Semitic. We have freedom of speech here so we can criticize religion!!!

    Just as I can freely expose the Likudniks that I believe orchestrated 9/11. If they happen to be mostly, Jews, so be it. I'm not angry at every Jew but for some odd reason these specific criminals like to hide under the cloak of anti-Semitism and the Jewish people as a whole.

    Jews can criticize christianity all they want.

    I would never advocate for violence or hate towards another human being but the idea that specific Jews use anti-Semitism, a misnomer, to call semitic people also anti-Semitic is idiotic.

    So, I ask you, censorship person:

    You can host that type of content but make it opt-in [Anti-Semitism]?!

    So, define anti-Semitism?

    If I don't believe Jews are a race does that make me an anti-Semite?

    What is annoying are users spewing fallacies and ad hominems. Calling Jews terrible things or muslims "sandn-word", instead of criticizing either their specific actions, traditions, culture or beliefs. The later should not be censored!! But powerful Zionist interests want this censored. And you seem to be pushing this censorship even if in ignorance.

    [–]FediNetizen 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

    I hope this whole comment was supposed to be making some joke that I just managed to totally miss. Anti-semitism is broadly understood to be hatred of Jews. It's similar to racism, except the main fucking reason we use the term anti-semitism is because being Jewish isn't just about belonging to a particular race, a point that appears to be totally lost on you, the guy who thought he was making a point with this brilliant line:

    If I don't believe Jews are a race does that make me an anti-Semite?

    No, it just means you've joined the rest of us in reality. There are people that identify as Jewish for ethnic reasons, religious reasons, and cultural reasons. And since it apparently wasn't obvious, my problem isn't with anti-semitism exclusively; that's just what I've seen the most often on this site.

    The later should not be censored!! But powerful Zionist interests want this censored. And you seem to be pushing this censorship even if in ignorance.

    The latter. The. Latter. You're missing a 't', bud. Powerful Zionist interests want you to come out of high school with a high-school-level mastery of the English language.

    [–]Jesus 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)



    Most Jews are NOT SEMITIC though.

    The conclusion is, that it does not matter though if a person is a Jew, a Gentile claiming to be Jewish, or a Gentile; all must come to Jesus Messiah for salvation.

    My point in the above post was that I have seen many revisionist-Zionist Jews spew anti-Semitic hate against Arabs. Judaism to me and other Orthodox Jews, is a religion above all, of the 1st covenant. For thousands of years Judaism was never considered a race. Palestinians and Arabs are, nevertheless, Semitic. I have a profound problem with Jewish terrorists like the Stern Gang, Irgun, Lehi and revisionist secular Jews who are really apostate Jews.

    Zionists, first created and Nazis, later used the blood purity, race narrative to categorize Jews. Just read some of Herzl's writings and you'll see that he was totally delirious. Befriending anti-Judaics and calling Jews "kikes."

    It makes sense though because some of the most prominent Zionist Jews loathed the assimilationist or diasporic Jews who refused to emigrate to Israel.

    Powerful Zionist interests want you to come out of high school with a high-school-level mastery of the English language.

    No, but certainly revisionist Zionists like the Likud had a direct hand in 9/11. Blaming muslim arabs for this false flag when all the Saudi "hijackers" had Mossad handlers in Hollywood, Fl., exposes severe anti-Semitism.

    The latter. The. Latter. You're missing a 't', bud.

    I don't have spellcheck on and your last sentence is a fallacy.

    May God bless you. And may Yeshua guide you.

    [–]joogabah 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    The irony is that Palestinians may be descendants of Jews who were alive in the region during Christ's time, who later converted to Islam.

    Have you read Dr. Judy Wood? There are a lot of anomalies surrounding 9/11 that can't be explained by either of the competing theories (the nonsense official theory, or the conventional controlled demolition theory).

    [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Yes, very true. But the Likudniks have a small facet within their ranks that also push this notion that:

    Yes, Palestinians can have a one state solution... However... They must convert to Judaism and follow Jewish law and serve in the IDF.

    What is there reason for this? The likudniks say:

    Well, Palestinians are Hebrews just like us. They were forced to convert to Islam 750 years ago. Hence, they need to convert back to Judaism and everything will be fine.

    Too late Likudniks and not a sound argument.

    If an entire mass of people, (group A) who converted to Islam, live in an area, with other Jews mind you, for nearly a thousand years practicing their religion and then some other group terrorizes them and steals all of their property 750 years later, do you think group A. would say, hey yes, you can have all of this land and we will convert back to our original religion of our ancestors to please you and serve in the IDF.

    [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Good video, it shows that Jewish revisionist Zionists loathed diasporic Jews to the point of killing them. Think Iraqi Jews or Iranian Jews. The point is revisionist Zionists tried to dehumanize Iraqi and Iranian Jews even to the point of killing them.

    That's why I've been saying that I see a lot of Zionists Jews spew anti-Judaic racial ad hominems on Jews, attacking their features to catagorize Jews. Herzl did this. The more fear a Jew has the more he will want to emigrate to Israel, which is exactly what the Zionists want.

    Like I said, I see Trump supporters say the most anti-Judaic stuff against Jewish features, no logical arguments to be made, not even sound criticism. My question to them would be if you mock Jews all the time, why then do you support Trump and Netanyahu? The former figurehead is loved by revisionist Zionists and the Likud in Israel and the latter is the leader of Israel. So, having caught a lot of them supporting these figureheads their actions lead me to believe that they are Zionist Jews attacking Diasporic Jews.

    [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

    Judaism to me and other Orthodox Jews, is a religion above all, of the 1st covenant

    A religion whose followers went around calling themselves the 'sperma' of abraham. Come off it Jesus. Jews are a distinct racial and ethnic group. If they weren't you wouldn't be able to identify them with genetic testing. For your argument to work Jews would have to go around openly expounding their religion as universal and they'd have to also be open to outsiders which they clearly are not. By their own strict doctrines their not. So you have multiple points going against your argument: testing, history, religious text, the words of Jews themselves.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

    95% of Jews are converts. They are NOT RACIAL. In fact calling Jews racial is exactly what certain Zionists would want you to say in order to keep Jews unified into pushing the Zionist doctrine. A doctrine that has persecuted many Jews and is the enmey of a Jew.

    Jews are an ethnic group. With culture and heritage and a false religion. Albeit one I wholeheartedly disagree with. They are not bound by blood or race. Only a very, very small semitic sevt is that can prove they are from the tribe of Judah. 2000 years there has been far too much intermarrying and gene mixing to contend that Jews are a race. Jews themselves before the inquisition never believed they were either.

    For your argument to work Jews would have to go around openly expounding their religion as universal and they'd have to also be open to outsiders which they clearly are not. By their own strict doctrines their not. So you have multiple points going against your argument: testing, history, religious text, the words of Jews themselves.

    Those DNA tests alone have been contradicted by other DNA tests and even the ones you claim still donnot prove they are from the tribe of Judah.

    They do not expound their talmudism, Jewish Cabala beliefs, Zoharism because they renounced Yeshua and have been persecuted theoughout history. The current religious Jews of today are the biblical offshoot of the pro-Creditor Hillel sect and the Pharisees. Not by race but by religious parallelsin their rabbinicalism and supremacy.

    The atheistic Jews and communists, many growing up in rabbinical homes renounced their religiosity for humanism or atheistic revisionist Zionism.

    They are not really Jews, because being a Jew means you practice a religion, albieit, a false one. That secrecy does not mean there has to be some sort of interconnecting blood /racial link.

    Testing fails to me tion the Khazarian theory and that they encompass all different areas in the Pale of Settelment where the Khazarian empire was and Turkey and later Germany. They are not semitic, in the sense that they have a racial link to the tribe of Judah. That lie alone feeds the Zionist doctrine.

    Ashkenazi Jews came from Japheth through Ashkanaz in eastern Europe. Many of them were converts. Some practiced Judaism well before the mass conversion. Read Wesxler's book on thr Ashkanazic Jews and their slavic-turkic connections. There are many other studies on this subject as well.

    [–]LarrySwinger2 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    He specifically referred to this post, and from what I understand, he wants posts like that one to be opt-in. Although I don't agree with that approach, I get where he's coming from. There's nothing constructive about a post like that. All it does is scare away new users and ruin the experience for others, especially the person being replied to.

    Anyway, this clearly falls under Pyramid of Debate (name-calling) and the solution is to report the user. So I'm not calling for censorship. Just pointing out that /u/FediNetizen is probably talking about something different from what you have in mind.

    Calling Jews terrible things or muslims "sandn-word"

    I think this is precisely what he's talking about. But I'll leave it up to him to clarify on that.

    [–]Jesus 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    Yes, crap like that should not be posted. It is not a logical refutation or argument or criticism against Judaism or Jewish supremacism or anything for that matter. All he did was categorize Jews into a distinct race with prominent features and mock them.

    That's something Herzl, the founder of political Zionism did.

    Also, this same user voted for Trump. And, I know, as do others here, that Trump is a fervent Zionist and quite loved by the Likudniks in Israel. So, I find it quite odd that he voted for Trump but uses this sort of anti-Judaic rhetoric. I can only conclude he might be trying to ruin this place or scare Jews away—maybe even to Israel. Surely, the Likudniks want nothing more than for Jews to emigrate to Israel. The more come, the more settlements will be built, the less land for Palestinians.

    [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Basically that post should have been monitored and if the poster kept on spewing fallacies, banned. If we are to follow the pyramid of debate accordingly.

    This is not a free speech sub to spew fallacies, but this current block feature will only create more echo chambers which I despise.

    [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    these specific criminals like to hide under the cloak of anti-Semitism and the Jewish people as a whole.

    It's a common traits of intelligent criminals to create a gambit that keeps them immune from investigation.

    [–]zero8 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    Im fine with the porn ban on saidit, admins say its too much trouble monitoring porn for illegal content so they rather ban it, theres already thousands of porn sites and they arent being censored its peoples thoughts and opinions that are being censored.

    [–]Extract 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Ah, my old friend False Dischotomy, with a bit of Affirming the Disjunct to boot.

    Your claim is that to support free speech, you must either support every type of expression or none at all? Yeah, that's a pile of bullards.

    1. A free speech forum can still decide on the range of topics it wants to cover. If it doesn't want to cover porn, but you are free to speak of any other topic, it's still a free speech board, as long as other topics are not selectively censored based on things unrelated to the decided range of discussion topics.

    2. Lines in the sand as to what constitutes harmful content has already been drawn, many years ago, and include many topics, such as the stated pedophilia and rape. What defines a true free speech platform is the resolve to not move those lines, protecting itself against a slippery slop leading in either direction. Dumpster fire sites like reddit have not treated those lines with respect, and look what they became over 10 years.

    [–]Jesus 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    And understand this Fedi:

    This kind of crap is anti-Judaic:

    Either post your nose or go the fuck back to reddit. Typical Jew excusing disproportionately violent black criminal behavior. Hate to break it to you, but us filthy goyim are catching onto how you kikes allow your golem's to attack us and our kids. 110 then again and again :)

    I condone not one single tithe of this.

    Now if you read some old books on Herzl and other prominent Zionists in the early 20th century you'll notice that they worked with Nazis to transfer Jews to Palestine. They all in many of thier diaries used this sort of language.

    For instance, look at many of the American Nazi parties. Some of the most priminent ones were led by Zionist Jews to SCARE JEWS to emmigrate to Israel. These Jews are nothing but a burden on every other Jew.

    Lenni Brenner, a Jew, exposes the partnership with wealthy Jews and Nazis.

    I've read enough to know that wealthy powerful Jew do not care about the common Jew just as power people in washington care not a drop for the welfare of others.

    [–]joogabah 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    Zionism is Jewish nationalism, the cardinal feature of fascist ideologies.

    [–]Jesus 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    It is. People co fuse Zionism with communism, although one could make the case that Mussoliniynism had features of authoritarian collectivist programs, but nevertheless Zionism is Ethno-Nationalism and racial supremacism. That's percisely why the p2 fascist lodge, world brotherhood incorporated, CMC-permindex and the CIA with Italian fascists like Gelli worked with the Likudniks (revisionist Zionists) to assassinate JFK.

    Jfk said he would splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces. They didn't like him. The mob (such as Lanksy and murder Inc. adherants to the Likud also DID NOT like him for his anti-mob stamces and Israel hated him once he became president because of his staunch dispraise and fight against Dimona and the Israeli nuclear program.

    All these fascist and authoritarian agencies worked together to kill JFK.

    And only FEW JFK researchers will go far enough and follow the money trail to admit it.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I think the revisionist Zionists are anti-Semitic. The revisionist Zionists think I'm anti-Semitic and sign laws to censor speech. free speech is free speech.

    Report the user for fallacies.

    [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Obviously anti-semitism exists

    As does loxism. But you I bet you've never heard about one of those words and you've heard a LOT about the other.

    [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Critiques of Jews (individually or collectively) is not anti antisemitism. Racism, sexism, and anti semitism are all 'irrational' hatred towards a group. Just because radical leftism is changing the language to win a culture war doesn't mean words don't have meaning.

    [–]joogabah 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to offend. Inoffensive speech is (by definition) never subject to bans. There's only 2 options - either free speech is inviolable, or you set up speech policing regimes that end up biting you. This is elementary and has been known for generations. Honesty, I don't want to live in a world where racists aren't allowed to speak their racism. How is anyone supposed to talk back to them or give reasons why they are wrong so that, even if you don't change their minds, you may be inoculating young minds who come across the arguments. When you shut it all down, you make it sexier to people just starting to be curious about the world. They'll want to know why they are not allowed to access the ideas. So just let the idiots speak for themselves. Very often they discredit themselves with their own words. Shutting down speech gives it an aura of legitimacy because it implies there is no effective counter speech. We've already experienced that on Reddit. They don't have a good counter argument so LGBDropTheT was silenced.

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Why join the site at that point when there are many other social media sites available that don't have this problem?

    Who is forcing anyone to join the site? Using Saidit is optional

    [–]Velocity 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I had one guy tell me to "post nose"

    Kek, there are some angsty types that come from some rough forums. They come and go. Ad hominems drag down the debate thing, and if it's egregious, then their comments can get [deleted].

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Did you read my posts? Go back to reddit then. Or make this place better by debunking those you disagree with.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    That guy is a Trump supporting Zionist... ignore him. Or hode his post, or better yet, debunk him.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    You're covertly advocating censorship.

    [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    but the types of "fuck jews" content you see on the frontpage is a turnoff to most people

    Those people can stay on reddit or any of the multiple other mainstream heavily censored platforms available for them to use.

    [–]FediNetizen 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    Would you say the same thing if you stumbled across saidit in an alternate universe where loxism happened to be all over the place? Since when is anti-semitism the dominant ideology of the site?

    I think you and I have different hopes for what the site will become. I hope it becomes a viable alternative to reddit that mimics the reddit we had 10 years ago.

    [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Would you say the same thing if you stumbled across saidit in an alternate universe where loxism happened to be all over the place?

    Yes and if loxism is prevalent the last thing I want is to have a big government or a big company or a big lobbying group hide it from me. I'm white though. My people don't have a history of living as a small group inside of larger societies and always needing to be on guard for the majority turning on them (justified or not). If I have to get a large group to protect me from critique and rhetoric then I've set myself up for living in a society with a group that secretly criticizes and plots against me. That's even worse. I'd rather people air their grievances even if those grievances insight violence against me. I will fully admit that not all people want to live in societies like that and I respect their right to live in other sovereign countries that restrict speech. I find though that most of the time it's not the weak that want to muzzle critics but the elites, the rulers. The rulers know how truly thin their control over the populace is. The right word or phrase could snowball into revolution. Revolutions can get out of control and sometime those 'utouchable' elites find their heads in baskets.

    I think you and I have different hopes for what the site will become.

    I think you know all un censored internet forums become dominated by dissidents. You should seriously think about why that is.

    I hope it becomes a viable alternative to reddit that mimics the reddit we had 10 years ago.

    That's impossible in 2020.

    [–]magnora7[S] 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

    It will certainly help

    [–]Extract 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    The best weapon against shills trying to fabricate problems is to take away any legitimate pretense they might have for those problems.

    Now, they can no longer claim they only want the admins to censor others "because they don't want to see all those scare posts".
    Of course, they can still claim more radical things, but it becomes much clearer to a neutral observer just how radical those demands are, and accept the shill for what it is.

    [–]wrongthink 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    For me it was about those blatant spammers doing the equivalent of smearing shit on the walls while everyone is trying to talk.

    [–]suckitreddit 15 insightful - 6 fun15 insightful - 5 fun16 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

    Nice. But I don't see the need to block anyone. The people around here are pretty good!

    [–]magnora7[S] 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    Note: If it ever fails to appear (as apparently sometimes happens on comments on threads) you can click "permalink" on any comment, and then it will appear.

    We're super happy to have this user block functionality because a lot of people have wanted it for a long time! Thank you d3rr!

    [–]HiddenFox 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

    This feature is great! Exactly what this site needs.

    It would be nice down the road if you had the option to either block and remove the comments completely (like how it works now) or have it so it says something like "Comment blocked. Click to reveal." and you could still see the responses to the comment.

    [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

    i agree that disappearing all of a blocked user's child comments is kind of heavy handed. we just tied into the existing block functionality as reddit had it. maybe we will change it someday.

    [–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    I hope you guys change your mind on this block function sooner than later - or that my hunch is wrong.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Your hunch might be right. But I think they are doing it more to attract people. The alt-right trolls, and hasbara trolls probably came her to ruin this place and spew fallacies. I hope, dearly that they either take this feature down in the future or work onnit enought to set some limits.

    [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    You should change it someday. Like tomorrow. At least make it so that they cannot ban another person immediately. You do realize this will breed self-censorship and cognitive dissonance.

    Besides, we already have a mute sub feature.

    If you're trying to get the site bigger by attracting more people and keeping the "nierfagt" spewers out then fine. That makes sense, but when more and more people come Inthink it would be best to set the block feature to color code the people who blocked you, as in real lofe you know who walked out on the debate and have the block feature work based on the minimum number of posts a person gets by someone in a given day.

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

    We added it because it has been requested often and for a long time. 'block user' links have always been there in your 'message' view, but yeah they are now usable in more places and much more prominent.

    I think a certain crowd of people will overuse block user, and end up missing out on some good comments, but the majority will use it seldom to never. But I imagine that me or m7 could be persuaded to change it up or turn it off. Maybe we should make a poll about it and post it to /s/saidit ?

    [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    That poll would be rather nice. I'm totally okay with people blocking me, but I just feel that blocking people immediately, before that person even can express his opinion or say if someone debates someone and the guy just mutes and dips out, there really has to be something where we can have the blocking feature of users but integrate it in such a way that it doesn't allow people to act on their emotion the first time they see a comment, whatever view they may have.

    I think that would totally balence out the block feature vs. the cognitive dissonance that plagues so many people today.

    Or just get rid of it, later-on when saidit gets more users. Because it is quite obvious there are trolls here.

    [–]joogabah 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    I don't understand why it wasn't always designed this way. It's a great compromise. Hide the content but don't block it, so that sensitive users can blame themselves for peeking if they are offended by it.

    [–]Overdrive 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

    Ah yes, what any sane person would do should they encounter words.


    [–]yishengqingwa666 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

    I look forward to curating my blocklist.

    [–]avena_sativa_3 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

    bait posts already down 90%.

    [–]LarrySwinger2 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

    I'm not sure how I feel about this. If everyone can create their own bubble, it'll polarize people. The fact that everyone sees each other's posts makes this a community, rather than just an aggregation of people.

    [–]magnora7[S] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

    On the other hand, if people are annoyed in to leaving the site by people who are obviously trying to drive people away, then this new feature will keep the community intact because people won't leave as often

    [–]LarrySwinger2 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

    But the offenders will remain on the site, free to ruin the experience for plenty of other people. It will also remove emphasis from moderation. People will have less of a need to report people for dragging discussions down, and they won't see those users' further posts to begin with, so they become unable to report them in the future. You're only conveniencing yourself by blocking, I think we need to go a step further.

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)


    This is a culture shaper whether anyone realizes it or not. Not for the better.

    What do you mean by a step further?

    [–]LarrySwinger2 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    Oh, I guess I was being a bit vague there. I mean that we shouldn't stop at conveniencing ourselves by blocking others, but help the mods make this place friendlier for everyone, by consistently reporting people who drag discussions down. I really value the promise that only repeated offenders will be removed. If the admins / mods stick to that, a balance is kept.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Couldn't agree more!

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)


    Our "convenience culture" puts all the responsibility on the "authorities". Just as the "free" services in the clouds are on someone else's hard drives - in most cases a giant corporation (IMO, everyone should have a server at home, even if they hire someone else to maintain it.) and admins are like the government while the mods are akin to police. We should ALL be our own police and contribute to making our community great. (And if we can collectively pull our shit together we can build vast decentralized alternatives with our own rules and more ways to interact.)

    I report it every time someone calls someone else a name. Petty, but thems da rules.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    This is an awesome post. If someone blocks me, can I still see his posts?

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    This is going to make SaidIt into Sreddit-lite.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    That's not a good reason to integrate this feature. Muting subs was more than enough.

    [–]Trajan 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Some will end up that way. Personally I’ll be happy to have any easy way to reduce the edgy boy Eric Cartman stuff.

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)


    [–]Breadman 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

    Thank you for this feature, you will save this website!

    [–]Jesus 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

    It won't help newcomers. They'll still see all posts. It will only help increase biases. I will use it on shills only. not people who disagree with me.

    [–]Extract 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

    Why use it on shills, though? Not seeing their threads simply means you cannot call them out and let them go unopposed (or, with less opposition).

    [–]Jesus 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

    True. I guess no blocking at all for me. I already have been blocked twice for so-called anti-Semitism.

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    This blocking is bad news man.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I agree. It sucks because people will react on their emotions and block someone immediately than listen to another opinion. It makes it much easier to create an echo chamber.

    And what is to say that person KEEPS commenting and doesn't realize he was blocked. /u/magnora7

    I'm sorry but I don't like the unlimited blocking feature. In fact I think their should be a max amount of blocks. particularly reserved to those who are spamming you.

    You might disagree but saidit is designed as a free speech hub. Even if someone writes a well thought out argument that person can simply block him on emotion rather than debunking him.

    Again, unlimted blocking is bad in my honest opinion. There should be a max amount.

    In real life, you can WALK AWAY FROM WHAT SOMEONE IS SAYING TO YOU. You do not HAVE TO LISTEN to them but thay doesn't mean you can tape their mouth up and have them cease to exist. They will speak up, and if that person ignores them, so be it!!!

    Which is exactly why I think you need to integrate a max amount of blocks, reserved to those that ACTUALLY COMMENT TO you and how much they comment to you in a given day, or something like that.

    That would make it so that the person would not be able to rely on his emotions and block the person immediately for saying some he doesn't agree with.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Best feature would be max amount of blocks and only to those who spam you in a given day. Say you can block a person after he posts to you in a given day 10 times or something like that.

    I think is a reasonable idea, considering so many people will act on their emotions before even thinking about listening to another opinion. So, if they have a feature where they can shut people down the millisecond they reapond to them, it will only breed ignorance.


    I really think this is a reasonable idea.

    Indon't know if you could integrate it into the code but like max karma posts for making new acconts or max karma posts for creating a new sub and a max number, this needs to also be applied to the mute button so as to not breed cognitive dissonance!

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Sounds complicated.

    How about a time limit? Automatically dissolves after a week or month or year.

    Or better: First time you block them is a week, second time a month, third time a year.

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I think this is a bad move too.

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    It didn't need "saving".

    [–]Flint138 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (4 children)

    Finally! If I cannot place myself in an Intellectual Safe Space, why even internet?!

    [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    The only people I'll be blocking are those calling for censorship. Not worth wasting the effort typing anything directed at them.

    [–]Extract 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Don't please - calling out those shills is extremely important, and if you stick your head in the sand, it wont make them go away - just let them post those threads with less opposition.

    [–]Edge_Finder 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

    i just hope people use intelligibly, its basically a form of self censorship

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Here come the bubbles. I see nothing good from this.

    Just because a child wants candy all the time doesn't mean they should get it.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Yup, the worst sort of self-censorship. One that breeds cognitive dissonace. I think this was a poor choice on Saidit, but it doesn't have to be if they integrate a color code showing who blocked you so you don't waste your precious time on them. Or have a mute/block person based on the amount of times he posts to you.

    Honestly, don't like this change.

    [–]redditsabsenteedad 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

    Allowing blocking lets morons stay in their safe bubble of positive reinforcement and over time it allows them the arrogance to build following. congratulations, you just recreated reddit.

    Stupid people deserve the negative feedback they get when they choose to follow users around and harass them, and they deserve to see the actual feedback their insipid ideas should rightfully get.

    [–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I couldn't agree more.

    [Repeated] Just because a child wants candy all the time doesn't mean they should get it.

    [–]Tarrock 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

    When we gonna fix the suggest title button for youtube?

    [–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    It used to work, then youtube broke it intentionally it seems. It wasn't us that broke it

    [–]Jesus-Christ 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

    This comment has been redacted for violating YouTube's guidelines

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

    I kinda broke your last fix because I discovered that it was not using our proxy server and was exposing our ip. I had to clean it up to check it in. Anyway I'm on it.

    [–]magnora7[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Ahh gotcha, no worries. Good to know

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    that's like next on my list. it's shameful how long it's been broken.

    [–]yellow_algebra_31 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Thank you /u/d3rr!! Now we can have moderation more under our own personal control: can't stop us from listening if we want to, and can't make us listen if we don't want to.

    [–]Red23 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Thank gawd for that!

    [–]Papitas 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Thanks! At last I can silence those loons talking about their binary politics in subs that are supposed to be funny 👌

    [–]m68k 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Good job. :)

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    One issue that Reddit had with the block feature is that if a user blocked a moderator, the user would no longer receive ModMail from the moderator.

    Has that been addressed?

    On one hand, I understand why ... a malicious moderator who knows they're blocked could get around it by using ModMail to harass a user. On the other hand, the user who blocked the mod will think that no one is answering their ModMail questions because it happens to be that particular blocked moderator responding.

    [–]magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Oh I don't know. Maybe you could make another account and check and try it and let us know what happens? That'd be helpful

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I tested with my alt! My alt has participated in a private sub I run, so it would definitely receive notification of being banned.

    Like I said, I can see both why that's a good thing, but also why it's a bad thing. It's really foolish of a user to block a moderator and still continue to participate in a sub, but it does most definitely happen. I had it happen to me twice that I know of on Reddit, once intentionally and once by mistake.

    Reddit's work-around was to have the blocked messages appear in the inbox, but with a statement that it was from a blocked user, so then the person had the choice to unblock to see it (or not). Meanwhile, here on Saidit ... checking the inbox as my alt, there's no indication anywhere that a message was received which has been blocked. Once my alt un-blocked me, the messages I sent as the subreddit (ban notification and the PM) appeared in the inbox.

    Reddit's approach to it worked I guess, but I never thought it was an elegant solution. It also didn't address another problem that's introduced when a user blocks a mod - which is that any announcements or stickies (like rules, for examples) that the particular mod posts will also go unseen by that user.

    What I'd like to see is:

    1) Users who block moderators should still be able to receive messages sent on behalf of the sub, but not messages sent directly from that mod's user account.
    2) Likewise, users should be able to see Posts and Comments that are distinguished as a moderator by that mod, but not regular ol' Posts and Comments from that moderator as a user otherwise.

    I don't know how complex it would be to make the first idea happen, since I know nothing about how ModMail and PMs are coded. The second, I believe, could be accomplished by adding in a check for:

    • .link .author.moderator
    • .comment .author.moderator

    [–]wrongthink 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)


    [–]brbmodule 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

    coming late to the party: im now able to "mute" obnoxious users and im sure it will get used a lot. what happens to the blockee - thats the blocked user here - does he get a notification like "x user blocked you" or something along that line? most folks today easily shrug off disciplinary measures like "ban/kick/timeouts". the "im banned at place XX" evolved into a badge of honor of dubious origin.

    does the blockee see something related that button? Does his browser-window shake a bit at his next login?

    and finally:

    [–]magnora7[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

    No, the blockee doesn't even know you blocked them. Which I think is good for minimizing confrontation, but we may change it to a 2-way block if enough people want it

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

    Folks should be notified about it otherwise some folks may waste unnecessary time/energy/frustrations.

    I recommend colouring users names who've blocked you, but I'm guessing that's easier to say than code.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

    Besides, if someone actually blocked you, you wouldn't be able to talk to them anyway!!!!

    So at least you would know and NOT WASTE YOUR TIME.

    In real life, if someone is in a debate with you, you know when they walk away!!!!

    [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    I hope this doesn't push more of a "policing" burden on the admins and folks who don't block.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    They need to integrate max amount of blocks and blocking only when a person posts a certain amount of times in a given day to you. That will assure that a debate can be attended to and not shut off the millisecond someone has a cognitive dissonance episode.

    Basically, I now think the unlimited block feature is a terrible idea.