Someone on Reddit has been saying someone has been able to report new members without proof and remove their threads by claiming to be the people they’ve reported. Out of curiosity, I tested this out. Turns out it checks out. For some reason, admins have allowed it to be possible. I found out my threads have been removed this way, so beware if you’re banned from somewhere or your threads are removed. This is the same person who thinks she can compete with Fedilore on Tumblr after being banned from Fedilore’s instance for signing up for KiwiFarms in order to prevent her friends from being backbitten on there before going on YouTube to complain about it.
You are trying to speak for what people see when they register. I am looking right at it, it’s not there.
Keep in mind as a side note that the R word is not a slur in most countries, and that many of the slurs some people do say on there are reclaimed.
I trust what I’ve read about the site, including what I’ve read on RationalWiki. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms
Conversion “therapy” isn’t considered bad in most countries either. Defending slurs is not a good look.
So you’d willfully rather trust second-hand information (possibly from an old source) over second-hand information from someone you are talking to right now and even first-hand information? And from RationalWiki, a website with notoriety for biased interpretation?
What are you getting at? Conversion therapy is banned in most countries. I don’t make the rules, I’m just telling you most countries don’t consider it a slur (why then randomly bring up conversion therapy, something that is definitely banned and definitely has a reason to). That’s just not a good argument.
I’m going to trust reliable sources. I’d rather trust those than someone who the modlogs say is an alt of a KiwiFarms member, since KiwiFarms members are known for not being the most honest people around.
It’s only banned in a handful of countries, actually.
That is no justification for using slurs.
Uh huh. Right.
Funnily enough, Rational Wiki doesn’t have many good things to say about Lemmy in general, including that it’s not always trustworthy when conflict arises. Would you risk half of the things you’ve said so far here to die on the hill that it’s a reliable source?
Also, I meant most civilized countries, the ones willing to place such laws. And go ahead and try convincing a country that slurs are never okay when that country doesn’t believe in those slurs in the first place.
Yes, that’s right. Most other sites are much more reliable than KiwiFarms and its userbase are. I’m glad we’ve come to an agreement on this.
I was talking about RationalWiki, not KiwiFarms. You are quoting RationalWiki claiming they’re quoting KiwiFarms. This is a strawman.
As for the conversion therapy part, I meant most civilized countries, the ones willing to place such laws. Try convincing a country that slurs are never okay when that country doesn’t believe in those slurs in the first place. It doesn’t usually work.
You said “most countries” with no mention of perceived civility.
KiwiFarms is a site that was created for hate speech. It is an extremist site by design. The userbase and the owner of a hate speech site are going to be maliciously biased for it.
So is RationalWiki.
I would say this about all platforms. If you want to see what a platform says, ask the platform.
The platform, at this moment, does not say what you claim it says. That is my point with that. It’s not up for argument when anyone can see for themselves.
Show me your source for your new claim now.