140
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
140 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
925 readers
456 users here now
For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.
Rule 1-3, 6 & 7 No longer applicable
Rule 4: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.
Rule 5: Be excellent to each other. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.
The Epstein Files: Trump, Trafficking, and the Unraveling Cover-Up
Info Video about techniques used in cults (and politics)
Bookmark Vault of Trump's First Term
Media owners, CEOs and/or board members
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I set up a community called "Keep Track" for just such an occasion:
!keeptrack@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.world/c/keeptrack
That's a great community! Thanks for pointing it out.
Both these seem awesome. But I have two controversial opinions on this.
First, I think there are way too many "lone mod hero communities" when there are others trying to do almost the same thing, and I think there should be more collaboration? Like maybe y'all should repost in others subs, selectively, or something.
Apologies if that seems offensive, but I am very touchy about this. I live in a world where too many coding projects, open source and corporate, just reinvent the wheel either because they didn't spot the other project... Or ignore each other for other reasons. The open source space is in desperate need of more integration, and that extends to federated social media.
Second, on your sub's rules @jordanlund, I have many objections to YouTube, but there are many creators on there who (to me) absolutely qualify as verified news sources with all the evidence/citations they show, more than some major websites. Some delivering news you'll find nowhere else simply because it isn't posted in text format. Hence I have... mixed feelings banning YouTube as a source, as I do understand the need to keep the funk away.
The problem with YouTube, and Substack, and, really, any social media is the problem with vetting.
I get it, your channel may be perfectly cromulent, but you know as well as I do that the well of crazy on YouTube goes pretty deep and literally anyone can start a YouTube channel.
Rather than vetting each individal channel, and then getting into arguments of "Buh, buh, you approved THAT ONE, why not MIIIIIIINNNE!" it's just easier from a mod perspective to go "Yeah, no."