zlacker

> Nothing is stopping you from expressing yourself however you want - just elsewhere, if you can't follow the rules

That argument doesn't work if it's a monopoly or a near-monopoly, which Wikipedia is. Also YouTube etc.

>>neonat+(OP)
Wikipedia and YouTube are as large as they are, in terms of user base, for their utility. Part of that utility does and continues to include some thin editorial voice. They're under no obligation to be all things to all people.

People have set up alternative data sources to Wikipedia. Conservapedia has existed for years. Its relatively smaller size says more about its relative utility then about anything ill Wikipedia has done.

>>neonat+(OP)
When I read these things I always have to think of Voat, the reddit clone that was 'open to assholes'. A lot of reddit users who could not follow the rules actually jumped ship, but what they found was that Voat was not really what they were looking for. They (ironically) did not find their safespace there because the other side of the coin was that other users could also criticize their views (extremism is exponential). That was not what they were looking for.

The other reason it didn't really work out well is that people need an audience. Voat was and is much smaller than reddit, so they had less reach. What I'm trying to say is, is that it's not a technical challenge, those have been solved already. It's people with extreme views who want to be able to express themselves where those views are not tolerated.

I'll join the protests once they actually start censoring, but if it's just like hey: don't be an asshole or you can just be an asshole somewhere else... I'm fine with it.

>>shadow+pg
You could say that about any monopoly or near-monopoly. Windows in the 90s etc.