Join us in bringing order out of KAOS.
KAOS = Knowledge As Our Saviour
KAOS is a way for your voice to be heard about ANY current event. We primarily use our website for this endeavour. However, we also are willing to have good conversations here, whether it’s about AI, Government or international issues, We want your voice to be heard. There will be absolutely no Doxxing or CSAM allowed, regardless of location.
This is a sister account to r/KAOSnow on Reddit.
Help us get up and running, ask your questions or state your opinions, all we ask is that you are straight forward with what your opinion is about, otherwise than that, we censor nothing on our actual website, here on Lemmy I have to abide by the rules of the Instance I’m on.
ETA: Just because there is no censorship, within law, does not mean we do not have any moderation. Moderation does not mean censorship. Moderation is the process of making sure that rules are being followed as well as governmental laws.
You must log in or register to comment.
No moderation means the place will eventually be full of bots and bigots, if it already isn’t made exclusively for these things already.
No thank you.
The moderation we are talking about revolves around not changing the person post.
If it’s not acceptable, such as bots posting, which we are in the process of setting up on the website, CSAM, doxxing etc are to be instantly removed and banned by IP address as well as email address.
We have taken those issues into consideration and are constantly working towards that end.
As for the bigot part, everyone is a bigot about something whether they know it or not.
No we have controls in place to prevent, or at least greatly diminish, the proliferation of bots. There are bots everywhere even here on lemmy. It’s a fact with the internet. You all seem to think that no censorship means no moderation, which is completely untrue. we do and will have moderation, and as the usage gets bigger there where be more moderators placed. The only bots we plan to allow are the search engine spiders and AI bots (without posting abilities). When a bot does get through it will be removed through moderation.
You all seem to think that no censorship means no moderation
No, we all just read the part that clearly says “no moderation of content.” Your words.
There is a difference between modifying the content in a post and removing it al together.
We want people to see the true you, not some canned response/opinion that has been given to you by the source, but rather your own unbiased opinion on the matter. Which means you better do research and educate yourself on the topic before posting. Like I said in other replies, you need to provide reliable sources of information, generally at least 2 of them, but more is better. The intent is to prevent an echo chamber effect. We also have a living constitution we are working on that allows changes as needed to help mitigate these problems, and all the votes are voted on by registered users, not the administration of the institution.
from https://kaosnow.com/index.php/about-kaos
believe in free speech, no moderation of content
yeah good luck with that.
Why do you say that? KAOS is not a government entity, its not paid for by governement, it is not even a blip on the radar of the government, but that is because we are still very new. We haven’t made an impact that draws attention to us, YET.
As a private enterprise, we are not obligated to follow government regulations, within reason. Yes we are aware of the GDPR and we will definately censor/ban any illegal things such as doxxing and csam or similar. We aren’t even allowing photos to be uploaded. Mind you this is all on our website, not here on lemmy. Our Lemmy community WILL follow the rules of our instance at lemmy.zip
Absence of moderation is in itself a form of censorship.
There will be moderation to prevent obviously harmful activity such as doxxing and csam amongst others.
But I am curious how you see absence of moderation as a form of censorship. If you could post anything you want without any repercussions for what you post, aside from others that would downvote you or point out what they see as wrong in your post, how is that censorship? No one changes your post, except you. Once again, with the exception of the aforementioned examples, how is there censorhip?
Generally, you’re going to get targeted on a personal level. There are enough people out there who turn factual conversations into a personal level. Either they’re offended by your perspective or fundamentally opposed or just a*holes. And they’ll call you names, yell at you, gather their friends to do the same and follow you around and try to make your life miserable… And then you’re going to stop sharing your opinion openly. That’s what they mean with »it’s censorship« (as well). Because you’re going to be systematically silenced by that kind of behaviour. It’s bread and butter on the internet. Especially on platforms which include anonymity or pseudonymous accounts.
I won’t, they can bitch and moan all they want. It’s a them problem because they don’t want to hear the truth that disagrees with their standing.
They can yell, call me names or anything else. They want to dox me, let them it just shows how weak they really are.
I think you misunderstand the problem. You can do that, yes. But have you ever moderated a diverse group of people? They’re all very different. Some are bold and loud. Some aren’t. Some are introverted or quiet. Or you somehow need to make them feel comfortable and safe before they speak up at all. Some say the first thing that comes to mind and they talk a lot, and some aren’t even part of the conversation and as a moderator you need to make them speak up at the right moment, effectively silencing the other people, because then you’ll get their nuanced opinion and they used the time to really think it through.
I’ve managed some people in smaller groups over the time and I can tell you your approach just silences the interesting people. You won’t end up with all opinions that way. You get the opinion from the dominant people, mostly the perspective of the confident men amongst them and relatively simplistic ideas. And the result of the entire conversation just won’t be great that way.
Edit: That’s due to the nature of the conversation and the dynamics with people. Additionally you can’t even talk about some topics this way. If something is dear to me and complicated, I can’t let that become subject of ridicule and let people pick on it. That’d really hurt. So I won’t even bring it up.
Actually I have moderated this groups. I knew coming in Thai wouldn’t be easy, but I love a good challenge.
As. Said in another comment, people complain the loudest and are quiet when there is no complaint.
I agree, we need to get the quiet ones more involved. If you have any ideas that would help accomplish that I’m up to listening. You can even post that in the !KAOSnow@lemmy.zip community.
How do you figure? Not arguing, just interested.
@preussischblau @howrar The Nazi bar problem.
We are currently looking into that issue, it was something I brought up a few weeks ago. The question to answer is where is the line of intolerance and tolerance. Obviously we don’t want to encourage any hate speech or anything along that line. We also have a living constitution for KAOS so that amendments and such as can be added, which will be our institutions basis for administrative decisions as well as regulations and changes to the terms or service.
To be clear, if someone is open about being racist, or sexist, or transphobic, they’ll be free to try and convince other folk that racism is good actually as long as they keep it civil and don’t start throwing insults?
that is exactly it. Let’s start having civil conversations about these things. Maybe we all learn something new, regardless of the side of the discussion you are on. The key here is civility.
I have zero interest in going to a place where people who want to take away other peoples rights are given a welcome mat.
The people that will go there are people who want to (civilly) hate on other folk, and free speech absolutists.
What you won’t get, is a genuine cross sampling of perspectives and viewpoints, because it will end up being dominated by hateful voices (civil voices, but hateful). And that’s what the other person meant when they said that no moderation is a form of censorship/bias in and of itself. Which is to say, you won’t saving anyone any time soon, because the people who do want to save folks will be the least likely to use the spaces
We aren’t looking for your concern, because we do have moderation in place. Now answer this, why should they not have an opinion? Doesn’t make it right, but we do want to be inclusive for everyone regardless of their outlook on things.
Besides, if enough people actually downvotes the person, it will help teach them about how wrong they are in the subject. People with the right attitude about this will help drown out the recklessness of these haters.
We also require links to sources that back their belief. These have to be reliable sources such as media websites and government websites.
I came here thinking they want to launch the next right-wing “free speech” platform. But now I’m not so sure any more. Maybe they genuinely think the marketplace of ideas works. And it’ll be the right idea coming out victorious… Which might actually happen if we indeed were to do rational and logical arguments.
I’d say be aware they might just not know, how people get targeted for identity. Or face more than moderate disagreements on technology and politics, because it’s not part of their life… This is all my speculation but to me it sounds like the genuine perspective of someone who doesn’t have a clue of the reality of the community you answer for. (And generally what people tend to do online.)
All identifying info is sha256 hashed and is not available, even to the administration. We also don’t ask for any identifying information other than email address, and that can be a throw away mail if they want.
We are taking this into consideration and are doing everything possible to mitigate that. Hell, you don’t even have to use your real name, and the only people who see the up addresses are administration, which is me and our co-founder. This info is only for security reasons which require banning an account.
If you put any identifying information on your post, then that’s all on you not us. Hell we don’t even show what state or country you’re from.
So. Are you going to post something or is it just a place holder?
no its not just a place holder. I’m actually doing a little research on a topic in my mind so that I have my facts straight. One thing we do rely on is facts and sources of those facts, preferably more than once source, so that others can go and check the source themselves to make their own opinions about it.
I will be posting some things, as well as others. This is a completely new process that no one has tried before. Anyone can post anything they have on their minds about current events. This is a way for you to say whatever is on your mind with out it being an echo chamber. We need dialogue, society needs to start having meaningful conversations again without fear of retribution. We used to do this all the time, when the lockdowns happened its like we forgot what it was like having meaningful conversations without the hate and vitirol.
I’m pretty sure something like that has in fact been tried before. I can’t remember the details, but we had some peer to peer platforms and other forums trying to establish full free speech with no censorship and no moderation. And turns out they’re quickly crowded by trolls, nazis and generally angry and hateful people who feel they’re censored and they’re looking for people who side with then online. And then we have things like 4chan or 8chan. Or platforms who claim to be free speech, but they’re just far-right. Like Gab, Parler and so on.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re looking for. If you want something that’s not an echo chamber and meaningful conversations, you’re looking at heavy content moderation, and enforcing those rules. If you don’t want hate, you need to crack down on it.
I’m looking forward to read the details on how exactly you’re planning to achieve it. Especially echo chambers / filter bubbles and misinformation are tough, and almost impossible to prevent or teach people about the truth after they’ve internalized them.
And I’d like to learn more about the planned technology and how it’s different from Lemmy (this place).
I forgot to mention, we were and still are discussing setting up a lemmy instance of our own for this, though currently I need to talk to our hosting provider to allow this to be set up. In the mean time we are using a forum for the purpose.
Well considering the founder has been looking at this for over 40 years and it still has not ever been accomplished,I find that hard to believe it has been tried before. Our intent is to let the polling authorities as well as the government to access this data on a purchase plan we are working on right now also. Which will strictly be enough to handle the service side such as the servers, web domain, and any other expenses accrued by the project. This is a non-profit organization first and foremost. We are not doing his to make money, as it is planned to be owned by the people, not any company.
They can look all they want, doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. We are aware of the echo chamber possibility, and we are planning to put measures in to help mitigate that, which is still being worked on currently.
We will also be moderating the process to reduce the hate and vitriol. We want civil discussions, if you can have a civil discussion without hatred there will be less problems on that. And yes I know there are people who thrive on hatred, especially in politics.
Hate speech, doxxing, csam and such will be moderated, the hate speech will be watched closely. The other offenses are auto-ban completely.
We have to draw a line at what is acceptable and what is definitely illegal or direct threats of harm to individuals.
One way we are mitigating the echo chamber is we request that you show reliable links to sources to back your claim.
Thanks for the explanation. Yes, looks like the combination you have in mind might not have been tried before. We had free speech forums. Which mainly failed to achieve their goal of becoming a marketplace of ideas. And we have several platforms for public participation. To collectively collect ideas and vote on them in a democratic process. (citizenos.com adhocracy.plus consuldemocracy.org and likely several others) I think those address NGOs, municipalities, government… and of course the people on the other end.
They might not exactly have the same scope you seem to have, though.
I think the main aspect will be the social part, not technology. People regularly come with preconceived opinions. Echo chambers are really strong these days and most people decline a meaningful conversation, to learn things and change their opinion. They come for affirmation and to blast their opinion at other people. And you’ll find a study and scripture to support pretty much anything. At least that’s what regularly happens to me. And people more to the sides of the political spectrum aren’t even open to reason and facts. But you’re likely aware of that. I think it’s the main issue. To first gather people around one table, and then make then listen to each other. Which is just very hard to pull off. They regularly don’t volunteer to do it.
