[creatorbytes]

Those are good points, some solutions that I've seen sites like BitChute use, or one that Twitter is contemplating, could be a combination of the following:

* Any illegal content would be removed

* Content that is more fringe, can be required to have a flag, where users must opt-in to see such content (bitchute's strategy)

* Non-logged in users by default don't see specific content. But this is made clear to the user, and content creator. Users logged in can elect what level of fringe they would like to see, or not see (sort of like twitter's banned words list concept)

The site would essentially aggregate links, and statistics of the platforms onto one page. So unlike 8chan, users aren't actually posting content, and I'm not hosting the creator's content. Maybe a MOTD from the creator, but I think that's manageable

I would like to hear what you think. It is a hard line to draw, my thinking is the site would be a sort of meta-site, aggregating the hosting platforms to one place, thereby removing the burden from creatorbytes. Domains will go through a manual process as to not be malicious/illegal, and once approved, are whitelisted.

Edit: All users will be able to see all creator pages, but previews for their content feed, or links with titles that are too fringe, etc, would have some sort of filter, and require log in.

[badRNG]

I certainly appreciate your principled stance against censorship.

I do have to wonder who this site is for. Who's viewpoint is censored on major platforms, but is also not "malicious/illegal?" What can a content creator host on "creatorbytes" that would otherwise be censored by major platforms?

It seems like a lot of platforms have tried to capitalize on providing a space for users banned from major platforms (Voat, 4chan, 8chan, etc.) and they all seem to face similar issues, and don't seem to foster any meaningful discussion that couldn't otherwise exist elsewhere.

[creatorbytes]

I'm going for less the egregiously banned crowd, more of the soft-banned crowd. So creators who are de ranked, shadow banned, or what not, but aren't removed completely from the platform. That isn't to say all content not on the platforms are too egregious for the market creatorbytes is going for, but there are cases where after abuse of YT's copyright strike system, the creators are off the platform for no fault of their own. Rather the abuse was from competing creators. Yet they're too small to make a fuss, and largely go unheard.

Typically I've seen this with conservative views. Though I understand I'll inherently be attracting more extreme ones as well.

Again I'd try not to foster discussion on the platform, but aggregate links to other platforms for their discussions to take place, hopefully removing the liability, at least partially.

[badRNG]

>I'm going for less the egregiously banned crowd, more of the soft-banned crowd. So creators who are de ranked, shadow banned, or what not, but aren't removed completely from the platform.

I'll admit this is an area that I don't know much about. Are there any creators you'd currently recommend who have been soft-banned from larger platforms?

And while I can certainly agree that YT's copyright system needs fixing, that seems like an issue that can't be fixed here, other than linking to another site who will have a different mechanism to prevent copyright infringement.

Is this meant to be like a curated list of content that one might not have seen otherwise?