@firstname.lastname@example.org @gid There's good evidence that moderation does reduce hate speech. If someone says horrible things about women or about people with disabilities, clear words and actions from moderators that these statements are not welcome do a lot to reduce them overall.
Without these moderator words and actions, the nasties proliferate and even encourage each other.
We have evidence that you don't have to tolerate the bad to keep the good.
@email@example.com @gid If thought indigestion is not a concern, you might want to read the original study:
@JordiGH @rice @gid the problem is that this rhetoric of "hate speech", "intolerant thought" and so on is just a mask to carry out a campaign of censorship towards ideas considered "not politically correct" and push neoliberism, globalism, imperialism etc. It's just an ideology that makes people think they are "the good guys while the world is affected by some sort of viral disease that makes the others intolerant and bad"... and this makes most people elitist.
@alexl I was wondering if someone would say something like this.
This is incorrect. Banning people who like to say how much they hate fat people and banning people who talk about how much they want to kill all black people does not mean that we are pushing neoliberalism.
@JordiGH @rice @gid but who is to say what is the bad? It’s a slippery slope, even my worst enemy should have a voice. Let them spew the vile hate fueled words many find offensive. For I will listen and try to understand. They cry out for attention and love. Because a piece of them is in need of repair. 🖤
A Mastodon instance for maths people. The kind of people who make \(\pi z^2 \times a\) jokes.
\) for inline LaTeX, and
\] for display mode.