Combining them would only lead to the destruction of both. Events on Reddit previously showed the two sides genuinely have different visions and don't get along. You'd just have a non-stop fistfight about what should be allowed and screaming that drowns out any content.
I don't know that I agree, here... when someone is pushing views that alienate the majority of the population and you're a corporation who needs customers...
As Michael Jordan allegedly said, Republicans buy shoes too. Put differently, someone like an author is a public facing brand ambassador. Your conduct will be held to a higher standard in those positions than a warehouse worker, and if you want to use it as a political platform, you may have that boomerang back at you.
If I were running BL, I would have fired this person too. Again, note their role. This is not a random non-public facing employee. The correct political stance for most public corporations to have is none; you are there to maximize profit for your shareholders.
Edit: It's not about being left or right in this case, either. It's that if you are going to be politically bombastic AND a brand ambassador at the same time, you're always going to be risking your job, because the brand matters more to a company than any one person.
I will echo this comment. Post the split, I have found both communities to be healthier, because the dichotomy between the preference in approach (hilariously aggressive vs. not) can be expressed by their users.
I don't find much value in talking shit to people here; I think you are more likely to alienate them with calls for raw aggression when KIA2 exists and caters to that and many (most?) of us post in both.
Doing this here is like screaming in the library, just like telling KIA2 to keep it down and chill the fuck out would be like going to a racecar track and lecturing about the noise.
I think it may also be that FB has the most mature lobbying efforts in DC, and they understand just how badly tech is fucking themselves right now and have drawn the line.
Trying to get FB out of both the censorship business and politics business (a complete ban on political ads of any sort from any party on FB might not be a bad idea) is probably the best path to not getting fucked over.
Twitter is instead furiously shoving their dick into a hornet nest.
I think it's good to have both, and hopefully the mods can put down the pitchforks now that reddit threatening to ban people over false flag user bullshit is gone.
I think there is merit to the approach of the KIA mods, though I haven't always agreed with their exact actions. I think there is merit to the approach of the KIA2 mods, though I haven't always agreed with their exact actions. Hopefully both can agree it's better that both exist.
This is precisely my point. So first, thanks for building it; that was 100% the right move as it was obvious the walls were closing in.
You can understand, from a brand perspective, Reddit closing out porn subs and even FPH, but The_Donald was actually a canary in the coal mine for us because it said "we don't want to be associated with people who dissent from the SJW orthodoxy".
That's a very different stance than "We can't have Unilever products showing up next to porn".
Second, it's sort of the core point of how this gets solved in the end and the ultimate goal for GG: if people hate you and kick you instead of taking your money, go somewhere that wants your money and engagement. The Win network is actually a sign GG is gaining ground, not losing it.
The best activism has always been what GG did right at the start: don't support people who hate you.
In many ways, GG is responsible for "Get Woke, Go Broke" being a thing, and if that continues to be a thing, companies have to respond. They always do so slowly, because shareholders take forever to wake up, but when they do, their vengeance is incredible.
I suspect worried; you can link to all kinds of other things and there's plenty of spam on reddit.
Taking away views and having a free speech alternative, however, kills their potential to "curate" the image and kills their advertising revenue if eyeballs leave.
I see why they don't want to promote a competitor but on the other hand, if they hadn't been a bunch of duplicitous cocksucking pigfuckers, they wouldn't have created their own competition from enraged users.
I agree with this sentiment. While KIA definitely hosts some conservatives, it also hosts liberals, libertarians, and those who defy classification under normal American political norms.
And yet one side stood up for the free speech of that entire group, and put their money where their mouth is on that.
I guess it says something about intellectual honesty when one side trips over themselves to censor and the other side is willing to host free speech even if they don't agree with all of it, so long as you are committed to being free.
It's almost like they were respectful to someone else's culture and represented it properly while making a kickass piece of media, instead of killing it, skinning it, and wearing the skin like a freakish suit while fucking the skinless corpse violently.
Rian Johnson take notes please.