This morning I made a post about the last remnant of censorship on Voat, in the hopes of sparking a discussion and finding a justification for why we continue to make use of a redundant and hypocritical feature. While no one in the thread was able to justify it logically, the thread and every comment I made in the thread was net downvoted.
Don't get the impression I'm bothered at all by the imaginary internet points. What does bother me, though, is the fact that none of the downvoters contributed in the thread at all. No one voiced a single reason why the system should be in place, no one was able to justify it, and yet the thread was downvoted and ignored.
Either Voat legitimately values freedom (and thus freedom of speech) or it is content with an echo chamber and safe space. I thought the former was true, but as this is my second failed attempt to get any justification for a broken system, I am beginning to think the latter is the reality.
People here like to mock those on reddit and leftists in general for being so afraid of our ideas that they are forced to censor us. And yet when legitimate concerns are raised about us censoring ideas unlike our own, we are happy to accept it? Is this the general sentiment of Voat?
Downvote this post as well if you wish, I don't care, but please explain rationally why you are in favour of such a system as we have in place, why you are willing to accept censorship, however uncommon.