Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lawlessone 523 days ago
That's great, what was it you were worried you couldn't say there?
3 comments

I consume on social platforms, rather than creating. I was growingly aware of the platform's bias on the content I saw and opted out for reality (as close as one can get to it, anyway). The changes this week are a step in the right direction as other viewpoints are more possible, let alone tolerated.
> opted out for reality (as close as one can get to it, anyway)

I'm genuinely curious to know what about reality warrants "as close as one can get to it". In my experience, every time I close the browser and step outside I'm generally convinced that what I'm experiencing is real.

Precisely. As humans, we use our senses to discover what is true and to what degree. When online, there's always a reality distortion machine running; the question is how much distortion is taking place
Depending on the website owners or influences there are always things you cannot freely say. Even here on this forum.
And what is that? Maybe I'm not deep enough into HN to know about this.
Eh, I'm just assuming OP holds views that a lot of people here disagree here with (thus end up getting downvoted), and writes it off as "not allowed to say it" here. That's usually the gist of why people complain about freedom of speech nowadays, regardless of their ideology. Yes, I understand there are billions of exceptions, and I understand how users get banned for "wrong think". But that happens literally everywhere, and all you have to do is to be loud enough to piss of the right people.

Everyone wants to be liked, and search for the venues where they can express their views where they would be a part of majority. Basically the reason why people skew towards echo-chambers, in real and digital life.

> That's usually the gist of why people complain about freedom of speech nowadays

At least in lower-stakes online forums, what really grinds my gears is a lack of transparency, where a site or service doesn't explain the moderation or even hides that any action was taken at all.

One example from yesterday of “what can’t be said”:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42630197

or

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42630067

Or let’s say, it technically can be said, but you get somehow punished (flagged, downvoted, etc) so you learn not to do it anymore. The incentive is simply not there.

There is a logic, the “community” flags to protect their own interests (financial investments, friends working there, etc).

And since the community is from the same group, they defend the same interests.

The more freely we can talk about a topic, the more genuine and thought-provoking interactions it can create (without intentionally hurting the others obviously).

If you filter too much, you get this LinkedIn-bullshit and it makes a message board super boring, as you live in a closed bubble.

Downvotes don't hurt me. They stop being a disincentive when there is no clear reason for them. It's often people just misunderstanding, misinterpreting or misreading comments and the replies keep flowing anyway.

It's not like you get paid for getting upvoted and a making any kind of joke is usually the fastest way to a downvote.

Please enlighten us.
That makes me think of the rejoinder: "It was for States Rights to do what?"