That's not the case on these other "free-speech" reddit clones - they're exclusivly far-right extremist content.
Redditors might call a place like Hexbear an echo chamber for instance, but it wasn't the members of Hexbear who chose to isolate themselves. Reddit made that decision by banning them.
Ironically, twitter (which does skew left wing at least in some places), while having its host of issues, has a much lower degree of echo chamber-ness because there are no groups, everyone is thrown in a pot together. It does have the cancel mobs and all that but an echo chamber it is not, which at least proves "echo chamber" isn't the default final state of any social media platform.
Could you point to 3 "far right echo chamber" active-ish (more than 50,000 subscribers) non-banned subreddits?
For "far-left" I'd say: r/politics r/LateStageCapitalism and r/socialism
EDIT: I knew this post was going to get heat. I consider myself a "leftist" (and by US standards I would be maybe consider a communist) but my point was that there is active censorship of right/far-right discourse in Reddit. Even in my pro-socialist/anti-capitalist view I like reading and seeing the other side's point of view. Main reason being that I think we should be open to other views to see the things to improve in our ideas.
I would invite people to engage in the conversation instead of having a knee-jerk reaction.
- r/politicalcompassmemes (basically all the popular 'meme' subreddits are far-right breeding ground)
- any of the "fight porn"/"justice served" have incredibly right-leaning commentariat
These are all things that regular hit r/all
Moderators for popular subreddit r/JusticeServed on Reddit — one of the most visited websites on the internet with an estimated 12 billion page views per month — said Monday that due to new site policies they are no longer allowed to permit posts, comments, or any other content that shows a person of color as the aggressor
[^0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/copypasta/comments/hndjv0/we_can_no...
[^1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20210123191934/https://www.reddi...
[^2]: https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/hmlqrt/commen...
[^3]: https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/hn5h3s/rjus...
it is 1990 Democrat, which today sadly is "right" given that "left" has taken an extreme left turn...
Politically biased rule enforcement is a bit different than having a community that invariably has to frame every unrelated thing in terms of a certain political ideology.
While your overall points are good, you derail a more more original comment into the standard partisan censorship discussion that happens over and over on HN.
Reddit policy definitely appears to be based on behavior, not ideology.
This is to be expected given the geographic location of their Admin staff, however to deny this to to pretend that CNN, MSNBC and Fox News are all "unbiased news sources" which everyone knows this to be false as well
While yes, Reddit Admins do take action on behavior, the Admins ideology allows certain groups more "benefit of the doubt" more warnings, more kid gloves than other ideologies do.
Any honest observer can see that in the pattern of Admin action
the same people that like to respond with "700,000+ dead"!
this is the same reason /r/fatpeoplehate got banned is it not?
yes the intent may be to "help through shaming" but it's not usually allowed, guess it's okay because of the political lean.
ironically, shaming the fat people would help the covid thing most of all as it's the #1 morbidity reason for covid.
Yes. You've made up an imaginary enemy in your head and you are talking down to others based on the imaginary Reddit company in your head.
The reason those other communities were banned were for targeted harassment, doxing of real people, and brigading other subreddits. Reddit has never stated that they were any rules on the "morality" of the content. The communities that are still around have not broken those rules yet.
Cool, so both sides don't have rules on morality and the only speech moderation we should be worried about on any site is illegal speech. I agree.
I never said that. I, for one, am not a free speech absolutist, and I think those that pretend they are, are children of the Facebook era of online discourse. I am iterating once again, that Reddit has clear rules and those rules have largely been executed without political bias. If your favorite subreddit got banned, they were very likely violating those rules.
It's a liberal echo chamber by design, no amount of gaslighting will change that, anyone can tell from 5 minutes of browsing.
It appears r/hermancainaward is 100% based on posts that the deceased willingly shared with the public. I think that's a meaningful difference.
Just a minor correction there: The majority of posts from the death people in HCA are from Facebook. I think that normally, people posts would only be shared with their Friends (unless you specifically change it to be public).
In that respect, posters in HCA would be publishing posts that were originally not meant to be public.
As an example, I might write a post in Facebook about me and my wife going on vacation to X place for 1 week. While it is OK for me for my friends to know that, I may not want this information to be public for fear of my house getting robbed while I am gone.
Although I completely agree with the sentiment and main point of HCA (and I actually have enjoyed the schadenfreude of some of the awarded people there), I concede that it is definitely a subreddit that is of quite bad taste and brings the worst of the "pro-vaccine" side of the argument.
You're supposed to feel a sense of comeuppance that these people who don't believe in the vaccine or dismiss the severity Covid died as a result of their beliefs. There is no shortage of mockery involved, either. It is disguised as simple schadenfreude, but I sense the subscribers are actually reveling in the deaths of others.
So much better people on Reddit. Much compassion, such intelligence. So advanced.
Reddit bans anything "far right" (whatever that means) that gets popular.
Extremist used to mean terrorist, now it's used for people you don't align with politically.
No one on [Patriots . win] is an extremist, but I'm sure you'd say they were.
https://patriots.win/p/13zg9agFHB/instead-of-eliminating-hun... promotes some myth about "the government wanting to eliminate 1e6 to 1e9 american workers" and proposes to "eliminate politicians" instead.
Comments by the OP in that thread clarify the direction this is supposed to take, responding to "The swamp in one picture" with "One Drone Strike".
Textbook extremism. (edit to add: or, as hunterb123 asserts, an edge lord. Since I don't know the site or user but hunterb123 apparently does, I'll take them by their word.)
I'd designate someone an extremist if they were plotting to do something, not some edgy comment that you'd find anywhere.
There's hundreds of comments on reddit wishing death, that doesn't make those people "extremists".
As for "comment that you'd find anywhere", I know a few places where I wouldn't find such comments. Not because oh-the-oppression, but because people don't engage with them in the same way as on that page. It's possible shape a culture and that site seems to have chosen one that is easily being mistaken for extremism, at the very least.
Anytime a Republican got sick, they'd wish for them to die throughout the front page.
You started this by mis-categorizing an edge lord as an "extremist".
Lacking any other information, and given a relative unimportance of that person to me, I'll take your word on that. Given the time you devote on the defense of that community, it's certainly more important to you than it is to me.
An extremist is likened to a terrorist, you need to have evidence other than some edgelord comment, otherwise they are just an edgelord.
Until proven otherwise you should assume they are the same as Reddit edgelords (actually most of them ARE or WERE Reddit edgelords!)
I'm not defending one community in particular, I'm defending everyone's right to be in the community they want without being dehumanized as some sort of monster racist.
Yes pgeorgi does look and quack like that.
Judge thee but not me!
But more than that: I also worked and work for organisations aligned with them in various capacities (currently I'm TA'ing at a state-run university, so while that's multiple hops away I guess it's a start? My fellow citizens often mix up what part is federal and what's state anyway, so it might as well not matter in the context of this conversation.)
The underlying joke is we're all just guessing and judging people based on a razor thin insight that is a brief comment on a forum.
Your statement about reddit is a logical fallacy.
I wish to apply that same standard to Reddit and see if it passes the same qualification to be "extremist" (it will).
tldr: I still haven't been shown a post on Patriots that is more extreme than anything I've seen on Reddit.
You say it's anyone who "wishes death", well that is too loose because that pertains to every community on every site, including Reddit.
Please try again with your definition of "extremist" and I will retest the communities.
Seriously?
How about for fun you try to explain what an extremist is?
We'll go from there.
But sure, some fantasy about neo nazis discussing tv shows that I'm sure GP totally saw and didn't just make up is relevant.
I guess my point is, yes, it can happen but it happens on both sides. Mostly, people just want a nice place to hang out amongst their like minded peers, and no that doesn't mean discussing Jews 24/7 believe it or not. GP talks like someone who has never talked with someone on the other "side". We're all people, stop dehumanizing the other political spectrum because you don't understand them.
tldr: the most extreme people on the right probably discuss Soros/Jews as much as the most extreme people on the left discuss Trump/MAGA. That doesn't represent anyone else.
extreme is used to denote it's a far swing in the spectrum, extremist alludes to terrorism.
Instead I think you should have directly questioned whether the connotation of violence was part of the point you were responding to.
That is even looser than wishing death and would cover many more communities.
Let's clear things up by a simple question:
How do you define "extremist"?
I'm not really sure what you mean by:
> Okay so would you like the criteria for all site's users to be a "connotation of violence" to meet the extremist threshold?