Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

337

As per title.

As per title.

(post is archived)

[–] • 4 pts (edited )

I'm not sure if that is possible with this site's format. Functionally, at least.

Even though we discourage using down votes, people will probably start to use it like that anyway as Poal grows.

When you create a subpoal, you are creating your own space for people who like what you like, so that already encourages group-think. However, there is no way to hide your posts from /all/ or /new/, so there's always going to be people on the outside being exposed to your ideas, unless they block the subpoal.

For now, all we've got is a culture that shames people for using their own free speech to silence others, and admins that are vigilant against subversive users.

I think we should be brainstorming and debating site functions that could help to counteract the tendencies that lead to group-think (and counter-act COINTELPRO tactics). Even if we fail in the long run, the successes we do have can at least be passed down to future free speech forums.

Edit: Sorry I'm not presenting any solutions.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

So, perhaps a note somewhere saying that people will be banned, edited or suspended arbitrarily based on the leaderships decisions?

[–] • 2 pts

Arbitrarily

Good God no. Any bans and suspensions should be clear as to why it happened. A clear rule set that is applied evenly to all users.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

A clear rule set that is applied evenly to all users.

And what are they?

All I can see is copyright, children, gambling, content "deemed" spam, doxing rules.

[–] • 2 pts

Well first of all welcome. Do not ever let me off easy. I would obviously argue this one. It’s legally a neutral public forum. I plan to actively try to stop brigading. I plan to be here everyday and try to make sure I do not let anyone turn it into an echo chamber. I won’t silence any argument but if you can’t back up your argument then people will see it for what it is. Last but not least here at least for now the downvote button is not an I disagree button.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

I am not convinced.

Reddit has tard gestapo and laws tighter than a fishes anus.

Phuks has pussy rules that allow them to ban anyone that hurts someone's feelings.

Voat has... Nothing.

Poal has... Nothing.

This site has lots of "free speech" scribbled all over the place, but what is to stop the:

downvote button is not an I disagree button.

[–] • 1 pt

Well I as the admin actively discourage it’s use as a I disagree button. However poal does have something voat doesnt. Check the warrant canary sub/link and you will see what I am talking about. I suppose I don’t have a hard or fast rule that stops people from using it that way but I would like to think if I’m active an encourage discussion rather than down voting it’ll at least somewhat influence the users behavior.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Free speech canaries, and free speech in general doesn't interest me.

This does:

I suppose I don’t have a hard or fast rule that stops people from using it that way

encourage

somewhat influence the users behavior

[–] • 0 pt

Who has phuks banned (apart from the obvious commercial spammers)?

Voat had a bucketload of rules that implemented heavy hivemind censorship - conversation is more free on phuks.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Posting content of any kind that incites discrimination, hate or violence towards one person or a group of people because of their belonging to a race, religion or nation is strictly prohibited.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

functionally? no anon, less user restrictions that hinge on scores, brigading scanned for by admin (anti-speech)

but really? YOU stop the site becoming another reddit/voat

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Not convinced.

If this place ever gets to the scale of voat, there is no systematic system or rules in place to prevent this.

[–] • 1 pt

What is your idea? Send it to instead of sitting in the corner, arms crossed, pouting you're "not convinced".

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

My issue isnt with the sites development. (a preview button when posting would be nice though)

My issue is with planning and governorship. Should I move my attention to another site, it would be a requirement that the same old issues would not surface. EG. I have argued extensively with every hate advocate on voat. They are almost all the same people. They hide "brigading" behind natural activity. Except I was once arguing with 4 of them and they all stopped posting at the same time.

Rules, systems, plans, how do you control free speech when that means you are free to do whatever you want?

[–] • 0 pt

I guess I have another question to pose. Do you have any proposed rules or regulations you would or could put in place that would solve the issues you see. If so theoretically how would you do it? I'd like to keep you as a user here. I enjoy our back and forth so, I want this place to not just be another echo chamber and I'll fight that however I can.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

You can't.

Classic voting system with "free speech" mentality doesn't work. You either remove your "free speech" or you change the method of community regulation.

Phuks removed free speech. Notabug was interesting, but all voting power was moved to the people with the best PC power. Fixes the issue of bots, but doesnt fix the issue of brigading. Also I could never vote because all my devices are pretty low tech.

So time to think special.

[–] • 0 pt

So your position is that the voting system is inherently flawed? Maybe some kind of vote limit?

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

See my other comment I just made about vote limits.