this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
580 points (97.1% liked)

Atheism

4046 readers
7 users here now

Community Guide


Archive Today will help you look at paywalled content the way search engines see it.


Statement of Purpose

Acceptable

Unacceptable

Depending on severity, you might be warned before adverse action is taken.

Inadvisable


Application of warnings or bans will be subject to moderator discretion. Feel free to appeal. If changes to the guidelines are necessary, they will be adjusted.


If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a group that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of any other group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you you will be banned on sight.

Provable means able to provide proof to the moderation, and, if necessary, to the community.

 ~ /c/nostupidquestions

If you want your space listed in this sidebar and it is especially relevant to the atheist or skeptic communities, PM DancingPickle and we'll have a look!


Connect with Atheists

Help and Support Links

Streaming Media

This is mostly YouTube at the moment. Podcasts and similar media - especially on federated platforms - may also feature here.

Orgs, Blogs, Zines

Mainstream

Bibliography

Start here...

...proceed here.

Proselytize Religion

From Reddit

As a community with an interest in providing the best resources to its members, the following wiki links are provided as historical reference until we can establish our own.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You're right, she shouldn't have signed up for that job. I wasn't talking about her case in particular, but rather the larger phenomenon of people being banned for having opposing beliefs, particularly in online places where you can talk (forums, social media, etc)

[–] Blooper@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 8 months ago

"Opposing beliefs" is often just coded language for extremely offensive, factually inaccurate, demonstrably dangerous, and often indefensible speech. Social media companies aren't obligated to keep posts about Jewish space lasers, Holocaust denialism, and pro-fascist ideologies on their servers.

Social media advertisers don't want their product advertisements appearing adjacent to batshit, nonsensical, conspiratorial, alt-right bullshit.

Having a Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or Instagram account isn't a right and having it taken away doesn't make you a victim. Nobody owes anyone else a platform to spew toxicity to the masses.

I'm using the royal "you" btw. I'm not saying you, specifically, are a Trump supporting crybaby.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Private entities are not the government.

If the government owned a version of Twitter, sure. Until then, good luck lol.

For the same reason I can tell you to get the fuck off my property. Doesn't mean you can murder, but it's mine. You don't get to plant flaming crosses on it unless it's upside down with a statue of Baphoment. Because then you'd have my permission.

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There's a difference between a small web forum with 3 users though, and something like Twitter, which is a gatekeeper and thus must be held to higher standards.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Legally? No, there isn't.

ISPs aren't even nationalized. Let alone private websites.

Also there should literally be no such term as higher standards. Standards should be equal.

[–] richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 8 months ago

Facebook should have the same freedoms to exercise discrimination than the redneck screaming in his backyard? Fuck that noise.