Slashdot Mirror
Radical Leftists Built Their Own FOSS Alternative To Reddit After It Banned Them (vice.com)
eeplox shares a report from VICE, adding: "Community-built sites like these are very much needed since Reddit announced they were going closed source": After r/LeftWithSharpEdge was taken down, ziq [one of the subreddit's members] decided to leave Reddit and create an independent anarchist community free from its rules. Raddle.me, which was originally called Raddit.me, is an "alternative that is focused on community building and openness, and not controlled by a corporation," ziq told me. The original name was intended to sound similar to Reddit, but was later changed to avoid potential trademark issues. Raddle doesn't have advertisements or run analytical software, so its size is difficult to calculate -- but that's by design. The site is meant to be an alternative to social networks that profit by monitoring user behavior and serving advertisements. "We have no ads, no tracking, no user profiling and we don't collect or share any user data with anyone," ziq said. The site is community-built and anyone can contribute to the code.
Ziq's commitment to privacy is an appealing virtue for Raddle's users. "I'm always very uneasy about the lack of concern for privacy online," Tequila_Wolf, a user who posts frequently to Raddle, told me in a direct message. "When you have friends on government lists who get harassed at every border because, say, they are members of Anarchists Against The Wall, you know you don't want to get on that list." Raddle ultimately came out of more broad problems ziq and Emma saw with Reddit. Ziq complained about how it has increasingly become a recruiting ground for the alt-right, the social network's overemphasis on America (r/politics, a major subreddit, only discusses U.S.-based politics, for example), and the fact that the site's code isn't open source, among other issues. Emma mentioned what she says is a problem with harassment on the site. "To me, the biggest problem with Reddit is how its administrators ignore the routine harassment and witch-hunts of marginalized people that takes place, with r/The_Donald being the most prominent example," she said.
Ziq's commitment to privacy is an appealing virtue for Raddle's users. "I'm always very uneasy about the lack of concern for privacy online," Tequila_Wolf, a user who posts frequently to Raddle, told me in a direct message. "When you have friends on government lists who get harassed at every border because, say, they are members of Anarchists Against The Wall, you know you don't want to get on that list." Raddle ultimately came out of more broad problems ziq and Emma saw with Reddit. Ziq complained about how it has increasingly become a recruiting ground for the alt-right, the social network's overemphasis on America (r/politics, a major subreddit, only discusses U.S.-based politics, for example), and the fact that the site's code isn't open source, among other issues. Emma mentioned what she says is a problem with harassment on the site. "To me, the biggest problem with Reddit is how its administrators ignore the routine harassment and witch-hunts of marginalized people that takes place, with r/The_Donald being the most prominent example," she said.
sign up. log on. wave to the camera
Right now the site seems to have no way to create forums (The equivelant of a subreddit), this concerns me, as if conversations are to be sequestered to an appropriate forum, then certain viewpoints can be silenced simply by not having an appropriate forum, turning the site into a large echo chamber.
Some people encrypt by using rot-13 twice. I prefer the more secure method of using rot-1 a total of twenty six times.
It's FOSS, good for you. Hopefully your site won't exist in a year but if it does, good on you.
I'm not afraid of opposing ideas. I'm afraid of people afraid of opposing ideas.
Listen - I may not agree with them on every position - and may even see them as harmful to some of their own goals... but I do see them as a somewhat helpful kind of crazy.
Why? Because for the past generation or so, we really haven't had any real forces of extreme leftwing pushing anything in the US. Not that this is a bad thing on it's own, mind you - but compared to the insanity of an extreme right wing pushing every button on every part of the societal machine, it's actually destabilizing to have the left version largely missing for so long.
Now, I certainly hear an opposing idea just while I'm typing this - that we have Democrats or college campuses, or something - and if you think of that as extreme left wing, you have no idea how the rest of the world thinks.
Without an extreme to exist as a philosophical sounding board, or as a 'wall' of what's too extreme to bounce against, the left of today in the US is largely crippled in culture - and obsessed with minor points of political correctness/friendiness to business, rather than actually tying to advance a real agenda of change.
I'd actually LIKE to have a crazy left to actually exist out there, willing to be grumbled about and dismissed. I'd like to have something Michael Moore can say "Geesh - those loonie lefties", then make a point that plots a 'sensible middle ground', rather than having nationalized healthcare like many modern democracies seem like some loony idea by reflexive 'moderate' idealists.
So go, you crazy folks - be extreme and let me disagree with you. It's cool with me.
It's all well and good to make another site, but let's be honest: reddit does about as good a job as anyone is going to do with a centralized discussion service. The only possible way to improve it is to create a decentralized alternative.
>"We have no ads, no tracking, no user profiling and we don't collect or share any user data with anyone
Two things will happen if the site survives a significant length of time:
1) Whoever is funding it will become a dictator, deleting posts and banning posters with whom they disagree, without admitting they're doing it and in fact doing their best to keep the fact a secret.
2) When the money runs out, they'll convince themselves that 'just a little bit of advertising is OK', and slowly sell out.
Then what's left on Reddit?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Yeah, that's just what we need now.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Reddit is too big to lump into a single category. It has multiple communities from all across the political spectrum.
Is /r/latestagecapitalism left wing? Yes. /r/thedonald left wing? No.
Is
Typically reddit puts up with subreddits as long as they don't advocate or end up used to commit violence. Both /r/politics and /r/thedonald want each other gone, but it's not happening until it becomes evident that purpose of the subreddit itself is problematic. It's not the level of political extremism, it's what the sub is getting used for and advocates for that dictates whether or not it's allowed.
Calling liberals or conservatives a "cancer on our nation that should just fuck off and die" isn't actually against the rules. Saying "so-and-so is a liberal/conservative, here's his/her address, go get 'em wink wink" is against the rules. If you have enough of the latter on your sub, it's getting the boot.
Never underestimate the stupidity inherent in all human beings.
If you think Liberal == Radical Leftist, then you have your head up your ass.
Peoples' political views can fall across a wide spectrum. It's convenient to demonize your opponents by shoving them all to one extreme end of that spectrum. Convenient and wrong.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Left winger here. I'll happily debate politics with people interested in a calm (if passionate) rational discussion. I will not waste my time arguing with somebody spewing racist dogwhistles with no intention of listening or thinking about the points made.
Never underestimate the stupidity inherent in all human beings.
Just what is a radical leftist? Additionally, what differentiates a radical leftist from a radical rightest? Does the radical mean you act on your beliefs instead of just espousing them?
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
So, I'm guessing Voat wouldn't have them, either? That alone should probably tell you most of these people are fuckwits of the highest order in the first place.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
What they really dont like is the presence of anyone who does not agree with them.
So they have gone and made their own little club, out the in the back shed, where they can make sure anyone who does not agree with them will be kicked out (the equivalent of the 'no girls!' club sign). They will make their big plans there, all competing to out do the others in how 'revolutionary' they are.they will virtue signal until they are red in the face and their 'community' will slowly shrink as anyone who isnt revolutionary ENOUGH this week gets excluded.
Meanwhile the rest of the world will get on with actual life, something they will be less and less in touch with.
Sad? yes.
Pathetic? yes.
But hey, its no different 'because its on the internet', the only odd thing here is that someone thinks its newsworthy. Its not.
You mean Democrats. Democrats are not left wing. Democrats are right wing. Democrats despise people who work for a living just as much as Republicans do, they're just less honest about it.
Trump was elected because Hillary was nominated. Hillary, who was a right-wing trainwreck of incompetence, warmongering and corruption.
Antifa and BLM are regularly killing police? On what planet?
That's true to a point as long as you do a few things:
1) Group all anti-government, non-Muslim religious based attacks as well as white supremacist attacks into the far-right category while at the same time often miscategorizing other attacks such as classifying Fort Hood as 'workplace violence' even with Hasan's confession about his motivations. That actually required an act of Congress to have to the dead and wounded be recognized as victims of a terrorist attack and awarded Purple Hearts.
2) Assign political motivations to non-political attacks. Not all attacks by right wingers are motivated by their ideology in the same way not all attacks by left wingers or Jihadists are motivated by theirs; sometimes an attack in a parking lot is just road rage with no deeper meaning.
3) Start tracking after 2001 and stop tracking after 2015.
4) Change the definition of threat as it suits your needs. In some reports "threat" is based off of actual deaths and in others it's by incident. So when you need a bigger number you count the 5 times someone was harassed on the street (with no injury) and say that is a bigger threat than a single shooting that killed multiple people.
There is also the fact that many Jihadist plots are stopped before the threat ever materializes due to the massive manpower dedicated to just that while far right attacks are not due to their limited nature and next to no dedicated special policing (they seem to be mostly of the "lone gunman", small or single target variety which are very difficult to prevent) . i.e. it's hard to stop a crazy person with a knife until the attack starts vs someone trying to buy large quantities of explosives.
It's just another case of statistics telling you whatever you want them to and not necessarily the truth.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
The "Tea Party movement" is reality TV. Meaning it's fictional, scripted, staged, with no reality at all.
The financial oligarchy controls all levels of government, now and before alike.
You have got to be joking. The Left has a firm chokehold on EVERY button of the "societal machine", which is the reason Trump was elected -
The societal machine that voted the right wing into both houses and the president? That's one hell of a chokehold! If the right wing was able to swing into such a strong position, then the left pretty much by definition didn't have a chokehold.
You can't logic your way into the right being in power somehow showing how the left is in power.
That sand was Trump
And both houses. You forget that too.
And as for insanity, possibly in thought but not in deed - right wing lunatics were not regularly killing police, smashing stores, burning things... Antifa and BLM are meanwhile happily doing all those things on a regular basis.
Bullshit.
But at the edges, the Right has NOTHING like the dark cancer spreading from the left
Apart from those be-swastika'd chaps chanting "blood and soil" and "heil hitler" you mean?
You claim to be an impartial observer, but you are clearly not.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
In the beginning of the 20th century the leftists were literally banned. Such figures as Stalin, Trotsky, etc. were stuck in prisons or penal servitude hopelessly. Nevertheless they resurfaced with a bang.
Even though nowadays those leftists may look ridiculous, in certain conditions such as a massive war, division of society into poor and rich, widespread homelessness, famine, etc. these ideas may again attract a public attention.
At least, the history demonstrates that it is a realistic possibility. Besides, it is proven already that the overeating causes health problems, spending time in a luxurious house as opposite to hiking, running at a stadium, etc. is also problematic. So, perhaps, an investment in helping people in need could be a good insurance against losing everything.
I have a colleague who said "fucking liberals" when I told him it's stupid to think that electric car technology isn't going to improve in the future.
To him, liberal is just an insult, he has no idea what it actually means.
The Right has the levers of power we're allowed to vote on. The rest of society we don't vote on, and they're hard left dominated.
All those bible belt religious grass roots churches etc are left wing? Huh! TIL!
As a Leftist told me recently:
Yeah maybe, but that round like a right winger's idea of what a leftwinger sounds like.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I don't really care enough to look into their beliefs more, but what I find most surprising is that they were too far to the left even for Reddit.
Reddit in general is among the most left-leaning social media sites out there. Even expressing a centrist or moderate viewpoint in many subreddits will typically get you punished in some way, if not outright banned.
It's typical to find what any reasonable person would consider to be extreme left content posted at Reddit all of the time. In some subreddits you're lucky if you're only subjected to socialist content, rather than what should be considered outright Communist propaganda.
These people must be really, really, really, really, really far to the extreme of the extreme left if Reddit isn't a suitable place for them.
Why should this surprise you? There are 50+ extreme radical communists groups operating in the United States of America that I could rattle off. At least 2 of them have me on a public kill list. Pause for a second and think about that -- what kind of groups make public kill lists? I'm on those list because I'm a semi-public face on an organization that defends the first amendment, and will not allow the heckler's veto to prevent events if at all possible. For this reason the communists absolutely despise me, and they certainly have no love for the III% or any other group standing up to protect people who are trying to assemble and hold an event in peace.
The need for moderating groups to prevent violence wouldn't even exist without years of these groups attacking people. I would venture to say much of the alt-right wouldn't exist without the extremists on the left pushing SJWism, and far too many so called centrist left being "okay with it" or at least not making any serious attempts to reign it in. It certainly doesn't happen in the major cities where the violence, intimidation, threats, and lawlessness of alt-left groups continues on largely unchecked.
I do take some exception with this article calling these folks anarchists and socialists. Most of them are hard core communists, many with an extreme SJWism twist that reminds me of Mao's cultural revolution. These are the last people who should ever hold a position of power anywhere in government.
I prefer to not call people nazis unless they are actually nazis. I find it lessens the impact of the term to misuse it.
And rational does not mean they agree with me - far from it. Rational means their arguments and positions support their professed viewpoints, nothing more or less. I have no interest in having arguments with people that won't be honest with themselves or me.
If somebody tells me that public health care is bad because the government wastes tons of money despite heaps of evidence to the contrary, I cannot have a debate with them because they do not believe in research, logic, or honest debate. If they tells me public health care is bad because the government's role is not to provide health care, then I can talk with them, because while I disagree with that viewpoint there's nothing wrong with the logic itself.
Never underestimate the stupidity inherent in all human beings.
Ah, yes, so you get to set the terms of the debate before it even starts. Agree with me, or I judge you lose before it starts.
I usually describe this as: "Do as I say, not as I do." It invariably creates a blind spot for the "invisible" activity, but also undermines the ability of the mind to see the truth in general because the mind has become used to lying to itself so it won't see the things it is not supposed to see. Obviously, at this point, the mind itself cannot detect truth and falsity, because the mind would have to see itself lying. That's almost as much fun as the Who's: "Pinball Wizard" who became deaf, dumb, and blind to hide a family secret.
A problem with highly intelligent people like this, is that they assume that their opinions are facts.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
"To me, the biggest problem with Reddit is how its administrators ignore the routine harassment and witch-hunts of marginalized people that takes place, with r/The_Donald being the most prominent example,"
Never mind that Reddit has done a lot to silence that (and other non-leftist) community under that exact excuse. After they dealt with the Violentacrez incident, they went from a user-driven site to an admin-driven site with highly-left leanings.
"Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
JFK slashed taxes, sent thousands of "advisors" to continue France's colonialist occupation of Vietnam, and lied his ass off about a "missile gap", that dramatically escalated the cold war. He also forgot to mention in his televised speech on Cuba that the entire reason the USSR wanted to place missiles there was to counter the nuclear-armed Jupiter missiles the United States had just installed in Turkey. He was also happy to play the racist card in a primary debate: "You say you are going to take ten thousand black people and move them into Orange County? It is just going to be catastrophic."
All right-wing actions, not left wing.
Certifiable. Democratic leadership, starting with Clinton has been to the right of Reagan. Bill signed a laundry list of massive deregulatory and corporate trade bills that Ronnie could have only dreamed of. He also passed draconian crime bills that tripped the prison population, militarized the police and threw gays under the bus for 15 years with DOMA. Hell, he even tried privatizing Social Security long before Bush did. And then Hillbots had the gall to attack Sanders as being weak on minorities.
Speaking of Ronnie, Reaganism didn't begin with him. It began with Carter. Deregulating the trucking and airline industries, appealing to right-wing Christians and attacked Ford for being soft on the USSR. Oh, and he was also happy to play the racist card: "I see nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained. I would not force a racial integration of a neighborhood by government action."
Right. Wing.
Repeal the 22nd Amendment, resurrect Reagan and he'd be the liberal in a three way race between himself, Obama and Hillary in 2020. Reagan insisted Social Security had nothing to do with the deficit; Obama wanted to cut benefits as part of deficit "reduction". Obama took Romneycare national, started a war with Libya without authorization from Congress (something his own VP threatened Bush with impeachment for if he did the same thing to Iran), fought his own party to pass the TPP, went to the right of the GOP with his "sequester" austerity. Obama also tripled the Afghanistan occupation, tried extending the Iraq occupation past the deal Bush made with Iraq, bombed three times as many countries as Bush, overthrew the democracies of Honduras and Ukraine, and repeated the Iraq "mistake" in both Syria and Libya. And Hillary is even more right wing than he is.
Right. Wing.
So explain Roy Moore?
Genetic experiment gone wrong? Dropped on head as a baby? Alien/human breeding accident? Donkey Goat fornication? I really got nothing....
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
In order to keep the narrative of white racism alive, "activists" keep turning to more and more ephemeral forms of racism, most of which require no conscious action at all on the part of whites. Conveniently, whites can not refute these racist acts nor can they really change, they can only *atone* for their inherent racism. Racism has become a kind of secular "original sin" -- an inalienable state of being for which they may only pay penance.
Unfortunately as more and more non-white ethnic groups immigrate and rise within the United States, it's becoming apparent that the "race problem" isn't "white racism" as broad, whites vs. nonwhites phenomenon, but is instead something more like "Why can't blacks succeed when others have?"
And the laundry list of others is pretty long -- Latinos, many of whom *don't even speak English*, have managed to thrive in the United States. The Hmong, living like it was the sometime before the 19th century managed to get ripped out of their own country by the US war machine and resettled to the prairies of the Midwest and thrived. The *Somalis* managed to escape a live-action version of "The Road Warrior" and thrive in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in spite of the obvious handicaps of negative sentiment towards Muslims *and* being African (inheriting existing negative sentiment towards American blacks).
How have all of these groups managed to establish working communities not defined by broken families and crime despite substantial cultural obstacles in mere decades or less while native African Americans continue to fail? Surely at some point we can start to talk about problems inherent to and unique to African American communities which cannot be blamed on "racism".