I mean sure I agree, but this conversation isn’t “just” about the Adjuster. The admins in the last site wide struggle session claimed they want to move the culture away from shitposting, but the problem is that the democratic centralism that the site runs on effectively binds the culture and makes the only “safe” outlet shitposting.
Anyone who’s been in leftist spaces esp. online for a long time has seen this kinda shit. It’s why we’re talking about this like we’re gonna get banned for it. It also shows the reactionary tendencies that under gird this site, that’s the problem with democratic centralism in practice, you don’t really get to ask why, like Amazon you disagree and commit.
You effectively can’t, at least in a purely in an additive way. Unlike Stalin this site uses democratic centralism not to maintain some kind of power structure, but as a way to provide an objective safe space for various people. The cost of that safe space is the curtailing of discussion about the practical aspects and difficult edges of organizing, politics and theory.
Switching to a more subjective moderation to promote discussion would put people at risk of having to deal with the discussions whether in good faith or not regarding things that may feel unsavory and unsafe. Also let’s be honest, there isn’t that much basic discussion of theory that goes on here in comparison to the shit posting, so the change really wouldn’t matter as much.
Unfortunately the left doesn’t have the easy simple problem of “eternal September” to contend with, we have an “eternal September” that has to be intersectional. It’s in general a problem of trust, and it’s a hard one to solve for online communities.
I mean sure I agree, but this conversation isn’t “just” about the Adjuster. The admins in the last site wide struggle session claimed they want to move the culture away from shitposting, but the problem is that the democratic centralism that the site runs on effectively binds the culture and makes the only “safe” outlet shitposting.
Anyone who’s been in leftist spaces esp. online for a long time has seen this kinda shit. It’s why we’re talking about this like we’re gonna get banned for it. It also shows the reactionary tendencies that under gird this site, that’s the problem with democratic centralism in practice, you don’t really get to ask why, like Amazon you disagree and commit.
how would you recommend this be fixed?
You effectively can’t, at least in a purely in an additive way. Unlike Stalin this site uses democratic centralism not to maintain some kind of power structure, but as a way to provide an objective safe space for various people. The cost of that safe space is the curtailing of discussion about the practical aspects and difficult edges of organizing, politics and theory.
Switching to a more subjective moderation to promote discussion would put people at risk of having to deal with the discussions whether in good faith or not regarding things that may feel unsavory and unsafe. Also let’s be honest, there isn’t that much basic discussion of theory that goes on here in comparison to the shit posting, so the change really wouldn’t matter as much.
Unfortunately the left doesn’t have the easy simple problem of “eternal September” to contend with, we have an “eternal September” that has to be intersectional. It’s in general a problem of trust, and it’s a hard one to solve for online communities.
astute observation, succinctly stated. thank you.