911
Anon interviews for a job
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
911 points (98.5% liked)
Greentext
3714 readers
1420 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
Mass censorship is very cool and definitely not a stepping stone to an authoritarian hellscape.
Perhaps it's a sexual thing. You know like if you are hit a lot as a child.
Perhaps Tankies learn to enjoy censorship and repression. That's the only justification I can think of for censoring themselves, it's pretty hilarious when you think about it.
I'm actually OK with it.
It's their instance, you can check the wordlist in the config. It's the
slur_filter_regex. If it would bother me too much I'd change instance or spin up my own.I'm more enraged by shadow banning like on "other platforms".
ml hands out bans people who slightly disagree with their Communist loving opinions, how is that not censorship like on "other" platforms?
Lol it's too much credit to call them communist loving. Marx would be turning in his grave if he saw the regimes these tankies venerate
Of course Marx isn't really a good hold up either. Any actually communist society probably wouldn't follow a lot of his doctrines. His beliefs, if actually implemented, would have all ended in civil unrest anyway. His views were inherently unfair and very much open to abuse and corruption. If you were unlucky enough to be on the bottom rung of society then that's where you stayed.
A modern view of communism would be much closer to socialism than anything Marx advocated for. At least socialism allows for social advancement.
On a continuum where you've got tankies on one side and socialism on the other, Marx would be closer to the Tankies end of the spectrum than the socialist. He's definitely not in the middle.
My guy you don't know shit. Marx believed in a classless society. There would be no "rungs". Also what he believed in is socialism, because communism is a form of socialism. This is what happens when you believe what the right wing tells you about Karl Marx without actually asking any leftists or reading it for yourself.
A lot of the things Tankies believe like the concept of a Vanguard party happened after Marx. Marx would have never approved of the USSR, or at least how it ended and all the things that happened under Stalin.
Yeah but he didn't. Because money still exists and been poor meant you got less money. So no matter what he said you would still have less. You'd need UBI to really go classless
The man literally wanted to abolish money in the long term. He also wanted to get rid of the profit motive. This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read talking about Marx.
Edit: also thinking UBI will lead to a classless society. What an absolute joke. Not saying UBI is bad or anything, but that's just not what it does. There went me thinking that I was clueless about politics, this is next level misinformed.
Fair enough. I know a lot of his views were rooted in traditions and biases he grew up around. My point was more just that tankies and places like modern Russia and China aren't really communist.
My girlfriend is Chinese and she has shared so many examples of classism and wealth inequality there, many of which are enforced by the state and its laws. China is in many ways no more egalitarian than the US.
Given the degree of government interference in the market there, I would say China is less egalitarian than the USA.
Karl Marx wouldn't approve of China though. Nothing about a classful society would be supported by Marx.
Yeah that's what I'm saying.
My bad, sorry.
Man, regex is really not the tool for the job here is it?
What? it looks fine to me, outside of the general difficulty of reading regex. I mean, it's not meant to be readable, it's meant to catch all the different spellings if what they want to filter and do so.
That's sorta my point, the complexity of regex isn't really warranted where a simple blocklist would suffice
bbrertardeds?
The idea that moderating slurs on an online forum is a stepping stone to an authoritarian hellscape really requires a special kind of brain worms
I got an instance ban from ML for two weeks because they treat "tankie" like some sort of slur.
The biggest bunch of snowflakes there ever was. They don't like it when you actively describe them.
Tankies hate accurate description generally. It threatens their way of life when people communicate.
Wtf is a tankie?
A dead body.
Well not really. But a tankie ain’t like anybody that you ever met before.
He’d eat Monopoly, and shit out Connect-4
Depends on what is being censored. Hate speech? Censor the shit out of it. Sexual stuff? Not needed.
Nope. Completely missed the point.
What is unspoken there is that censorship is always based on good intentions such as yours. People trying to censor sex are trying to do the same thing you’re trying to do with censoring hate speech.
“Only censoring the bad stuff” is not the solution here. It’s the source of the problem.
Automated censorship is never a good thing.