Nice bait post, but you are deeply mistaken about Voat.
Voat was way worse that what you try to paint Poal with.
Voat had plenty of 'user' subs that were banning users just for the lolz.
Voat was filled with brigading shills who could silence anyone with mass-downvotes with the benediction of Putt (who admitted, before he shoah'd the site on Christmas day, he was part of it with an alt account).
On Poal, you can't brigade users to the point where they can't comment/post anywhere/anymore.
Poal is a free speech platform (with a very few set of rules defined in the ToS) and users are free to subscribe to a user sub or block it.
If you don't like a sub, feel free to block it and move on, or even better, make your own.
I bet you had a laugh watching the action yesterday. My misunderstanding. If I was aware that a POAL sub could be structured to restrict my speech like , I'd long forgotten about it. Now, after much excitement, I won't forget. Yes, POAL is tamer than VOAT, the minimalized down voting/brigading, elimination of porn, great up time, and other features make it a better platform.
I don't want to make my own subs and have the burden of maintaining them, although searching for sub categories that don't yet exist tempt me ... just to have that category established as a repository for breaking news that I post (I.e. "Brazil", " Trump2024", etc) but I don't want to be the one cluttering the list of sub categories. I can usually find a sub that these articles will fit into but at times it's challenging. I like organized and intuitive structure.
If I was aware that a POAL sub could be structured to restrict my speech
You are still deeply mistaken. It's not about restricting your speech and it's not specific to Poal. It has always been that way.
That's how subs work on all social media platforms that let you create sub communities. You can define a set of rules (that do not supersede with the ToS) and run your community as you please.
If you create a sub about bicycles and make a rule that forbids users from talking/sharing content about motorcycles (or any other vehicles), this is your right.
What would you think if someone was making a post complaining that you are taking away their speech (the right to talk about trucks in your bicycles sub)?
I am admittedly a noob about creating social media communities. I was a news junkie that stumbled upon the Q movement and VOAT, without straying far outside of that community. Now I've been active on POAL for a couple of years, primarily the two Q subs and maybe a year ago began posting news outside of those subs with no issue.
I don't see your equivalence of trucks/bicycles applying in this situation. Let me paraphrase your example - I want to discuss the truck they have on display in their truck sub, but I want to show them why some of their assertions about this truck are wrong. I bring facts snd receipts that expose the errors in their truck. Not being a free speech sub, they can simply exercise their bias, dismiss my facts with receipts as jewish propaganda or nigger rigged fallacy in violation of the sidebar rules and ban me from the sub. Though I have not violated ToS, not violated the sidebar rules for that sub, the owner/mod can simply decree, without proof, that I have indeed broken the sidebar rules and ban me. And this is fine. Essentially don't prick our bubble or you get banned?
Do I have that right?
(post is archived)