Well of course this was going to happen. If you remove "objectionable subs" (which is arbitary as I will explain below), the first place they will move is the places that won't remove them and then people say "look see this is what happens when you don't do moderation, this place is toxic man". Well of course they are going to be concentrated on the sites that don't have stasi like moderation. This has to be some form confirmation bias.

Btw what is a "objectionable content" can be completely arbitrary e.g. a subreddit that was a criticism of consumer culture was removed, there was nothing on there that could be considered objectionable. I won't even get into the removal of criticisms of the Chinese Communist Party since Chinese companies own a large stake in reddit now.

>subreddit that was a criticism of consumer culture was removed, there was nothing on there that could be considered objectionable

I know which one you're talking about, and although I'm not saying it should have been banned, there were plenty of highly upvoted objectionable comments there which the mods consistently let slide. Let's not pretend it just randomly angered some Marvel fan Reddit admin.

Holy crap.

>but the footage of the suitcases full of ballots after they cleared out the building

You mean this? https://voat.co/v/news/4145790

All I can see is a very blurry picture of a women carrying something. The chart is also unconvincing, considering that the same chart also shows republicans beating democrats 2:1 in another time interval (near the very left of the chart). All in all, not very convincing.

Here is explanation what happened: https://www.thegeorgiasun.com/2020/12/04/fact-check-were-sui...

The Republican Secretary of State and his officials says there’s nothing unusual about the video in question. So, is the presumption now a vast conspiracy involving democrats and republicans to turn the election for Biden?

I don't know, this is the first I'm hearing of it. After reading your comment and looking that up, apparently others are saying all of that is normal.

(Sorry, I didn't mean to make this a political thread.)

They can post it somewhere with standards of evidence if they want to be taken seriously. Why waste time looking into it on the off chance it has more veracity than everything around it?

The logic around these election fraud posts usually goes something like this:

1. something "suspicious" is presented

2. only conclusion must be election fraud, no explanations to the contrary is explored or accepted

3. go to step 1, preferably before the "MSM" debunks the first instance.

You can try this yourself: try to find any election fraud claim from 2+ weeks ago that turned out to be "legit".

A glaringly obvious logic fail is “any apparent fraudulent behaviour must be on behalf of the winner” - er, no - it would be much more likely for the intended benefit of the less ethically sound candidate.

(Which one that would be in this case is an exercise left for the reader)

How can I try it myself? Nobody is giving me access to the information I need to actually draw an informed conclusion.

I found it impossible to verify claims like this: https://twitter.com/DavidShafer/status/1334995992102506498

All that seems reasonable to do is to wait for all court decisions.

Yikes

Yeah voat started out with good intentions but quickly degraded into a right-wing magnet.

It’s the exact political opposite of Reddit. Which makes sense, I guess.

Ruqqus doesn’t seem as bad though https://ruqqus.com/

One of the front-page posts right now is from the "JewishQuestion" community, so uh... yeah, that's pretty damn bad.

To me it seems worse. Let's see here, the first 10 things on the page are all political, and right-wing or extreme libertarian memes:

* A stonetoss comic about the relationship between race and IQ. This was the top post on the page. It was posted by a user with the username "NationalSocialism".

* A comic caricaturing an asexual person who decries Christmas but celbrates a silly celebration of their own, supposed to show hypocrisy

* A comic showing a caricature of a fat black woman shouting in a white woman's face, and the white woman pushing her away. The title is "At this point if a White woman looks at a Black wrong she is a "karen""

* A post from the "Controlavirus" sub-forum, arguing that lockdowns mean life has lost its color. (One of the only non-caricature comic and reasonable posts I could see on the front page)

Even on a bad day, load up the Reddit front page and it's nothing like this, even if you were to browse for hours, you wouldn't see an endless stream of reductionist memes a 14 year old might find funny.

Reddit is a worse version of HN for nuanced and well-argued discussion. Ruqquus seems to be a caricature meme sharing board, and even one which lacks even the pretense of a varied userbase. At least Reddit pretends. When I visit a site that's supposed to be better than Voat, I don't expect to be greeted with the exact same thing but with more memes and less news sources.

Scott Adams when talking to Sam Harris said there is "two movies on one screen".

I consider myself a "center-right liberatarian", however when doing political compass tests I come out right in the middle of the quad. I frequently try to _steelman_ the opposition.

So lets go through your examples:

> * A stonetoss comic about the relationship between race and IQ. This was the top post on the page. It was posted by a user with the username "NationalSocialism".

The Stonetoss comics I've seen pretty racist and usually contain anti-semetic tropes. So I will give you that one. No argument from me there.

> * A comic caricaturing an asexual person who decries Christmas but celbrates a silly celebration of their own, supposed to show hypocrisy

There is a lot of people even on the left that believe a lot of people have replaced traditional religion with some other form of spirituality. Usually this person proclaims themselves to be an athiest and laments about traditional religion while claiming to be. It is a trope, but there I've certainly seen it and it is somewhat of a hypocrital position.

So I don't see anything particularly wrong with this based on your description.

> * A comic showing a caricature of a fat black woman shouting in a white woman's face, and the white woman pushing her away. The title is "At this point if a White woman looks at a Black wrong she is a "karen""

The person that posted it could be racist. However to give someone the benefit of the doubt from your description this is commenting on the perceived hypocrisy. Karen means "entitled white woman" and I've seen it used as an insult (to deflect from the actual issue) to a white women making a valid complaint about someone behaviour (and that person happened to be black woman).

> * A post from the "Controlavirus" sub-forum, arguing that lockdowns mean life has lost its color. (One of the only non-caricature comic and reasonable posts I could see on the front page)

A lot of people are suffering due to the corona virus lockdown. My grandmother's dementia has gotten worse because visits to her are very restricted due to the lockdown and it been very upsetting to my mother.

So out of the four examples you have given. Only one I would find objectionable based on your description. Whereas you have found 3 that are objectionable.

> Even on a bad day, load up the Reddit front page and it's nothing like this, even if you were to browse for hours, you wouldn't see an endless stream of reductionist memes a 14 year old might find funny.

I find most of the content of the front page on reddit trite. It is full on worn out pop culture references, consumer culture nonsense, cute animals, strawmanning right wing politics and ideas and other crap that I am not interested in.

As for "reductionist memes a 14 year old might find funny", most of the people that spend a lot of time online on these sites are younger. I've noticed as someone that is almost forty is that a lot of this is younger guys blowing off steam online because they are frustrated by their circumstances.