oh

I went from Ancap to Minarchist. I'm familiar

You mean, monarchist

I am thinking we are getting out figurative grounds of the analogy, Beemann, that I am trying to use to illustrate the base user to base user interaction, because in real life you can kill someone to shut them up, all analogies break down due to not being the literally thing it is being used to compared to. The reddit rules, moderation, & administration structure is not the semi-similar, but not a government structure that we assume acknowledges, allows & limits the bounds of laws & rights . The concept of the analogy is that ignore & criticize content while propping up other content with attention & praise, both content that was allowed to exist to compete against the other.

No, I mean minarchist, @missdanger
@da britian moderation is authoritarian by necessity, and the base system of Reddit lends itself to an underlying mob rule. Trying to draw weak comparisons to public squares wont work because it *isn't a good analogy*

But what can a mob on reddit actually do? Sure, the can upvote stuff & downvote stuff, they can comment on stuff, but they can't remove stuff.

They can systematically flag down content and make it much harder to find, to the point where it isn't shown by default

The same can be done by not commenting early enough on a post, is it unfair to those who did not jump early enough in on content. Or say discord where if you post something you want to talk about some but fifty spam them out , then is it not unfair opinion is drowned out. Even if we were to take out those downvotes out of reddits system, then people the most popular opinions floats to the top, while the unpopular ones don't. Each of these systems works to the benefit of one group over the other, but depending on what you want for the structure discussion & content organization, you are probably going to pick one of them, or a mix them (this one being the one reddit falls into sort-of).

Alternatively you can create a system that outputs content randomly, which is as close of system that is non-discrimatory.

Having more posts is not the same as *hiding* posts

Can we get an honest comparison here?

No aspect of discord works in the way reddit does

There is no inherent feature of discord where say 10 users can modify what others see by default

10 users can comment each to displace content a margin of ten guaranteed. If you want the see it then you have to put more effort in by scrolling up.

Already addressed this

Heck it would be worse on discord in concept because you can only down vote a post once on Reddit, where as you just need one person to make as many comments as they please to displace someone with a bunch of embedded link. Though that is one downside to the discord structure, not a reason for why discord should be considered terrible.

https://twitter.com/jimmy_dore/status/1032734078720569344

👏 👏 👏

Have the left excommunicated him?

So here's the funny thing:
The left has always alleged media bias because the "bigwigs want money and defend the capitalist system" (see Manufacting Consent by Chomsky)
The right has always alleged media bias because polling, geography and contributions have always said the media is far more on the left than the right.

What happens when the two come together to because the bigwigs want H1Bs and the broader left wants to get paid out?

M A S S C E N S O R S H I P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qVeZroE0FU

I didn't know this happen... no news about it at all. Back in 2010 during Obama's presidency.

Oh, they did more than control the whole corridor.

They built up better cell phone service than anyone on the continent.

And blocked traffic in Mexico.

And virtually replaced the government...

Gary

What was that community in mexico that the cops and the cartels dont fuck with again?

The avocado farms one?

Without a shitshow I came here looking for some information regarding "race realism". What information or online places can I look for this kind of research without going on radical right or radical left sources?

Any information you guys can give me with sources would be great. Thanks

i'm not sure you are going to find anything about 'race realism' that isn't from a radical pov

I understand. Are there any talking points for or against this notion?

It depends on what is against "race realism?" Is it the concept of refusing to learn the objective differences between "the races" that some maybe superior &/or inferior to others in certain? Or is it refusing act upon that that knowledge if it is an actual thing?

race realism just seems like the practice of selectively deciding that correlation = causation when it suits you

but i do find it humorous that race realists unironically argue that they are inferior to asians

I mean what points can be said to debunk race realism. Like Kraut and tea's video on it. I know it was pretty bad but some arguements would be nice

```race realism just seems like the practice of selectively deciding that correlation = causation when it suits you```

usually i just stick with the argument that socioeconomic factors early in life have a proven effect on intelligence and that they don't account for that at all

i think you are right