I mean, do we really have to self-censor? Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand the downvotes don't matter.
Suppose I began posting porn, or furry art, or other stuff that the natives considered "degenerate". The downvotes will flow. Poal at least doesn't stop your posting and upvoting ability for it, but still. respond to you also
Yeah, but my question is who cares about downvotes when they have little to no consequences?
I mean, fuck it. There are some cool people here but I generally don't fucking care what strangers on the internet think of me. If I post something on poal that people find genuinely objectionable and I get a metric fuckton of downvotes, that's rough. But no one would stop me, assuming it's not CP or the like.
See my convo with PMYB2 in this thread for my explanation on why I think votes matter
Downvotes are for what people consider spam. I intentionally decided I did not want a system where something got hidden based on votes or restricted based on votes. Sorted okay. So I'm not sure that qualifies as censorship. Just my 2 cents
As I said, Poal doesn't censor your ability to say what you want. But logicstically speaking, downvotes hurt, hurt lack of a better term, the credibility of the poster regardless of ramifications. Two posters with similar arguements about an unpopular topic, like let's say Orange Man Bad, the one with more votes might be given a pass by the angry masses, while the other will be considered a shill or SBBH minion or something equally demeaning. Budda is a very very good example of this. He holds fairly liberal views and has made posts historically on Voat calling out Trump and Q tards. But let's pretend it was Gabara, or Sanegoat. Would they be given the same respect and pass on their views?
Don't misunderstand and think I am knocking Poal as a platform. All I am saying is that if you don't self censor yourself on these platforms to exclude material that isn't what the masses think, you risk becoming a paraiah
(post is archived)