More than 200 Substack authors asked the platform to explain why it’s “platforming and monetizing Nazis, and now they have an answer straight from co-founder Hamish McKenzie:

I just want to make it clear that we don’t like Nazis either—we wish no-one held those views. But some people do hold those and other extreme views. Given that, we don’t think that censorship (including through demonetizing publications) makes the problem go away—in fact, it makes it worse.

While McKenzie offers no evidence to back these ideas, this tracks with the company’s previous stance on taking a hands-off approach to moderation. In April, Substack CEO Chris Best appeared on the Decoder podcast and refused to answer moderation questions. “We’re not going to get into specific ‘would you or won’t you’ content moderation questions” over the issue of overt racism being published on the platform, Best said. McKenzie followed up later with a similar statement to the one today, saying “we don’t like or condone bigotry in any form.

  • BainesEnglish
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    there is nothing worthwhile lost silencing nazi bullshit from social media

    • Cosmic ClericEnglish
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago
      edit-2
      10 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      there is nothing worthwhile lost silencing nazi bullshit from social media

      " as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise.

      If you don’t win the argument, the argument goes on forever.

      • BainesEnglish
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        lol imagine trying to ‘win’ an argument with an idiot instead of just mocking them for the lulz

        • Cosmic ClericEnglish
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          lol imagine trying to ‘win’ an argument with an idiot instead of just mocking them for the lulz

          It’s not about winning, or replying directly to just the troll/conflict bot.

          It’s about leaving an elaboration of the initial opinion, for everyone else who comes by later to the topic and reads.

          • BainesEnglish
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            it’s not trolling to refuse to engage bad actors

            anyone who thinks you can reason those fools into enlightenment is lol

            mock, deride, condemn, move on

            social rejection is how you handle it, when they want to be a part of the social contract they can return