Because if the posts aren't deleted then there will be so many off-topic posts with no connection that the good information won't be seen by people. You end up with low-effort posts over high-effort posts. When enough people are submitting, and this subverse is starting to get large enough that this is happening, there isn't enough time for people to voat up good information before it is pushed off the first page.
People are not retarded or limited in their ability to sort things for themselves. That's why they've got this far. If you want start a /sub for "Most Important Information that Should Not get Lost" and just re- post what you think is so important we need to censor others so that this most important key thing gets through to people.
As I mentioned before, there are thousands involved with this. Not everyone will be drawn to take the same path in what they investigate.
There is a glut of info on this subject. The Facebook groups on this are just popping. I see that as a feature , not a bug.
There's nothing "retarded" about not being able to sort through information because one didn't see it. Right now, the first post on the second page is from 4 hours ago. Most people don't search the 2nd and 3rd pages, and most people don't go online every 4 hours. And this is with the moderators deleting information. In fact, if a person comes online every 12 hours, they need to search through 4 pages of information to find all the information they missed. In my view, it is censorship by white noise to censor nothing. There's a reason our sense have a limited spectrum.
You want to take away the ability of moderators to moderate. Right now they have the power to moderate. I'm arguing basically to keep things the way the are now, with maybe a minor tweak. And yet you say I'm complaining and you're not when you are fighting for radical change and I'm fighting for status quo or a minor tweak.
Why re-write the definition of "Pizzagate" ? That is the definition by which something is deemed appropriate or not for the /sub.
If it was to stay the same - the definition would not be changing.
That is grammar, and grammar is the first step in logic.
I thought this over: And now youve given me some questions.
Obviously, if what you say is true, the Mods have been without directives.
Since there would be no need to change the definition of "Pizzagate" if the one they were working under was deemed suitable.
'Til now there has been no definition of "Pizzagate?"
If untrue, ( i.e there is a working definition )- that means someone one has found the present one "not good enough" and therefore is looking to change it.
So, when I weigh in, on my conviction : i.e. There should be an overwhelming necessity to remove something, if that is done [otherwise people can think for themselves], it's not because I don't think the "Status Que" is good the way it is. It's because I'm anticipating changes.
People can sort the info themselves. That is why they are here. No need to be thought police.. We get that anywhere. That's cheap. That's on every street corner.
This needs to be something different. A place where people who can not do their research, talking and thinking anywhere else, can go.
Why am I anticipating changes?
1 . Experience with para - political research: i.e. the past; Knowing what happens to such groups And also recently reading the directives handed out to people who are tasked with stopping them.
and 2. Reading some people complain that there is not enough culling of the materail - and claiming no one can read through it all, and that people get lost , and that no one can keep up with the posts because there is too much slippage, and things "disappear" after 24 hours.. when that is plainly not true. I look at the posts and check the pages.. And the same posts are there . I go through the pages and the slippage is not severe.
Why would they be making those claims if they did not want to throttle material?
And the majority here and the majority of upvotes are for keeping a broad data collection goal.
If more people come in here, when the flood gates open, that could change? I don't know. We will see.
I've suggested that back up /subs or "streams leading into the large river" could be assembled and collected.
Someone needs to say why that simple solution will not work, before they go changing the rules for stiffer criteria for staying on the /sub.
The point is that most people don't look beyond the first page, and if someone checks every 12 hours, they have to go through about 4 pages of information. So sure, if they checked once a day they could go through about 8 pages of information, but not many people will actually do that.
view the rest of the comments →
samhara ago
But no one has still ever explained why the post would have to be deleted.
atheist4thecause ago
Because if the posts aren't deleted then there will be so many off-topic posts with no connection that the good information won't be seen by people. You end up with low-effort posts over high-effort posts. When enough people are submitting, and this subverse is starting to get large enough that this is happening, there isn't enough time for people to voat up good information before it is pushed off the first page.
samhara ago
People are not retarded or limited in their ability to sort things for themselves. That's why they've got this far. If you want start a /sub for "Most Important Information that Should Not get Lost" and just re- post what you think is so important we need to censor others so that this most important key thing gets through to people.
As I mentioned before, there are thousands involved with this. Not everyone will be drawn to take the same path in what they investigate.
There is a glut of info on this subject. The Facebook groups on this are just popping. I see that as a feature , not a bug.
atheist4thecause ago
There's nothing "retarded" about not being able to sort through information because one didn't see it. Right now, the first post on the second page is from 4 hours ago. Most people don't search the 2nd and 3rd pages, and most people don't go online every 4 hours. And this is with the moderators deleting information. In fact, if a person comes online every 12 hours, they need to search through 4 pages of information to find all the information they missed. In my view, it is censorship by white noise to censor nothing. There's a reason our sense have a limited spectrum.
samhara ago
Well then start a thread / subverse with only the stuff you think is important. Easy.
atheist4thecause ago
How about you go to the subverse that already exists that allows everything for pizzagate and censors nothing?
samhara ago
You're the one who is complaining.
atheist4thecause ago
You want to take away the ability of moderators to moderate. Right now they have the power to moderate. I'm arguing basically to keep things the way the are now, with maybe a minor tweak. And yet you say I'm complaining and you're not when you are fighting for radical change and I'm fighting for status quo or a minor tweak.
samhara ago
Actually yeah, the title is "defining the focus of the sub" so everything is "on the table" "Status Quo" is not set yet.
atheist4thecause ago
Status quo would mean how things have been operating. You're not very good at this.
samhara ago
Why re-write the definition of "Pizzagate" ? That is the definition by which something is deemed appropriate or not for the /sub. If it was to stay the same - the definition would not be changing. That is grammar, and grammar is the first step in logic.
samhara ago
I know. They are looking to change the Status Quo. that's why the sticky. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
atheist4thecause ago
They are looking to define, not necessarily change.
samhara ago
I thought this over: And now youve given me some questions.
Obviously, if what you say is true, the Mods have been without directives. Since there would be no need to change the definition of "Pizzagate" if the one they were working under was deemed suitable. 'Til now there has been no definition of "Pizzagate?"
If untrue, ( i.e there is a working definition )- that means someone one has found the present one "not good enough" and therefore is looking to change it.
So, when I weigh in, on my conviction : i.e. There should be an overwhelming necessity to remove something, if that is done [otherwise people can think for themselves], it's not because I don't think the "Status Que" is good the way it is. It's because I'm anticipating changes.
People can sort the info themselves. That is why they are here. No need to be thought police.. We get that anywhere. That's cheap. That's on every street corner.
This needs to be something different. A place where people who can not do their research, talking and thinking anywhere else, can go.
Why am I anticipating changes?
1 . Experience with para - political research: i.e. the past; Knowing what happens to such groups And also recently reading the directives handed out to people who are tasked with stopping them.
and 2. Reading some people complain that there is not enough culling of the materail - and claiming no one can read through it all, and that people get lost , and that no one can keep up with the posts because there is too much slippage, and things "disappear" after 24 hours.. when that is plainly not true. I look at the posts and check the pages.. And the same posts are there . I go through the pages and the slippage is not severe.
Why would they be making those claims if they did not want to throttle material?
And the majority here and the majority of upvotes are for keeping a broad data collection goal.
If more people come in here, when the flood gates open, that could change? I don't know. We will see.
I've suggested that back up /subs or "streams leading into the large river" could be assembled and collected.
Someone needs to say why that simple solution will not work, before they go changing the rules for stiffer criteria for staying on the /sub.
atheist4thecause ago
The point is that most people don't look beyond the first page, and if someone checks every 12 hours, they have to go through about 4 pages of information. So sure, if they checked once a day they could go through about 8 pages of information, but not many people will actually do that.