Conveniently, these “tools”, more often than not, are the ones moderators some how “like” (unconscious bias, as someone put it) more than the others. Anyone pointing that out, is simply going “berserk” and is unwelcomed as “hostile”. I wonder if the mods received replies from NextDNS (a “tool” they seem to “like”), and if it made any difference if they didn’t.
Anyone can skim for 2 minutes and link to a relevant Wikipedia page of fallacies without even knowing what it actually means (ironically enough). For instance, using “argument from authority” can be a stand-in for, “oh shit, here’s someone who knows what they’re talking about; how do I get them to fuck off”; and when mods do so, the actual imposing “authority” here (“what’s on the website is generally the truth”) are they themselves (even to the extent of arguing from made up realities while requiring “proof” from everyone else).
You’d note every single mod active on this thread “liked” this post that has multiple ad hominem remarks, violating the very code of conduct they hold everyone else to. A cult-like behaviour, the way I see it (which harks back to OP’s original claim about lack of any kind of diversity in thought).
I think you’ve failed to notice fanbois in this thread and in other threads.
And given the browbeating I was subject to here by a mod that went unchecked (and even encouraged by one other poster here who went, “If it was me, I would have lost my patience sooner”), I feel revulsive engaging at all. Might be wise to limit myself to topics pertaining to The RethinkDNS Company.
That said, for all its flaws, PrivacyGuides is probably better than other similar forums for most folks. I especially find Jonah and Daniel to be exceptional. Just not when they are at my throats, especially when I am trying to contribute in good faith.
This thread certainly has me rethinking my usage of RethinkDNS
Were those topics of discussion moderated and removed? I recall that discussion happening - I was a part of it - and it not being acted upon because the community at large (myself included) felt that what DDG was doing made sense. I do not recall any bans or deletions or ‘censorship’ or anything like that, but I might have just missed it.
No, it was in the discussion “Censorship in DDG” where two of my posts were reported by some and censored by the modos, because I had argued that it was not normal for DDG to censor pro-Russian content, but not Western, that it lacked neutrality.
At this point, I should know better than to involve myself in these types of discussions, but oh well.
I have noticed that there is a minority of PG Forum and Techlore Forum members that just love to try and go after projects just because they don’t like someone who is involved in that project. Some examples:
The CEO of Brave is a homophobe, Brave Browser or Brave Search shouldn’t be used.
I don’t like Daniel Micay, GrapheneOS shouldn’t be used.
I don’t like how the developer of LibreTube responded to me, LibreTube shouldn’t be used.
I don’t like the responses of RethinkDNS developer, I will Rethink (pun intended) my usage of it.
It’s almost like these people that are doing this are completely saint and never did or do anything wrong or bad.
The above is obviously not true and is impossible. Would you like to be cancelled or your work to be written off just because someone finds out that you did/do something wrong or did something that some people wouldn’t like? Think about it.
If you would reread the post in question, I did not in fact make any ad hominem attacks on you. I stated how it appeared to me, from my perspective of the conversation. There is a difference between a direct attack and giving a viewpoint from someone who’s looking at the conversation from the outside.
I don’t know if Brave Search practices censorship and regarding Startpage, it relies on Google and Bing for their results, not like DDG who voluntarily made this decision.
I’d argue those are some widely varying examples you’ve given. From idealogical issues with someone, to paranoia, and more.
Personally I’m not a fan of the way Daniel Micay or GOS in general handle criticism, or even just general media outreach and communication. However I still use GOS and have been for 8 months now. It’s the best secured OS available. They still respond better than the Libretube developer did when handling the recent Youtube issues, and when there are better, more stable options that communicate and update like Newpipe, Grayjay, or Freetube, why keep that recommendation.
The issues with Brave come down to ideology which everyone is allowed to have their views and beliefs on. PG shouldn’t, and I don’t think does, evaluate products based on their ideological viewpoints.
As to RethinkDNS, I’ve never tried it, I use NextDNS myself, but that wouldn’t stop me from recommending it. People who know more about the subject than I do recommend it and seeing a dev get defensive or upset once or twice doesn’t necessarily take away from the project, see GOS points above. I have no issues with the project, but would think twice about trying it now, just like I had to do some thinking before deciding to give GOS a try because of their public reputation and history.
Moderation of course is always looked at through the lens of each person individually, we put our own emotions, value systems and “faith” into any “confrontation” with an opposing opinion into these things.
For me personally, the moderators have helped by giving advice and even suggested the right tool to effectively overcome the language barrier so that I can express myself as if I were thinking in English, if of course such a description would be appropriate here.
Off Topic about DDG
I see you’ve been repeating a lot about DDG censorship. I am interested in this topic because I use it.
I literally just typed “pro-Russian news sites” and the search results are adequate.
just good to add some perspective here.
when posting my reply here I actually was not a mod yet. could probably be worded better but in essence i stand my the meaning of it.
then about the coc mention. That was done in reply to other comments that got removed due to violations of the coc, not the replies still visible.
Besides thst critisim (like you have on PG) also on tools has a place on this forum all of those examples you give are actually recommended on the website, and there is no intend of changing that at all. This does not mean they cannot be discussed or challanged.
My dude… I’ve been trying to see things from your POV, but this is a bit much. For that post to contain any ad hominem the definition would have to be stretched so much as to make it meaningless.
An ad hominem is when you try to make the correctness of your argument based on the character of the person you’re arguing against. E.g. “No one should listen to X because they like to sniff glue!”.
Calling someone a name (which didn’t happen in said post) isn’t an ad-hom. Naming you an antagonist is barely moving the needle on aggressive communication.
The context is, @Rasta (still!) incorrectly assumed Rethink is a “direct competitor” to NextDNS and that meant I was arguing in bad faith. And in that context, despite self-admitting to their technical inadequacy in understanding the exchange between me and Daniel, judged that I went “berserk” (which, last I checked, meant “crazy”) in trying to “force” (as in, being a bully) my point.
This is what the dictionary I have says, “An ad hominem remark appeals to personal feelings instead of logical reasons.”
Thank you. You’re kinder than most.
I offered you to DM me to discuss why you used the words you did. That offer still stands, and I’d appreciate it immensely, if you did so.
Ah, I see. That isn’t even close to what I’ve learned in various philosophy courses. Rational Wiki’s entry is what I think of when ad-hom is mentioned. It specifically calls out that insults are not ad-hom.
Regardless, I won’t keep bogging down the discussion over definitions.
So: It wasn’t an ad hom, but an insult? And then, mods “heart” the insults?
PG Code of Conduct goes, “The following behaviors are considered harassment and are unacceptable within our community: Trolling, insulting and/or derogatory comments, including personal or political attacks.”
offtopic
Argument from authority, mate… but it is the right kind of authority you bring (:
