Administered by:
...makes WHAT worse HOW, according to them? 
meh.
@jlsigman ping @Impossible_PhD in case you weren't made aware yet.
@irati @jlsigman I'm well aware, and not happy about it.
Unfortunately, the only other platform out there that can do what I need it to do is Medium, and their financials are *very* not good right now; I don't trust their long-term stability. Secondly, Substack has superior anti-spam and anti-harassment protection, which unfortunately matters given the size of Stained Glass Woman.
Believe me, I'm watching with keen interest for a robust third option that has strong security.
@jlsigman I don't know what Substack is?!
@LinaB It's a blogging platform that had gained popularity as a way for people to do newsletter type things and get paid for it.
@jlsigman thank yoy
@jlsigman add that to the list of reasons to hate substack
@jlsigman this is one of the reasons I don't pay subscriptions to any newsletter hosted on substack, no matter how the author deserves it
@jlsigman Just think how this asshole's reasoning would play out if this was 1939. He would be advocating for Hitler while Jews were being shoved into an oven. The Jews would be saying, "Never Again!" while this guy is talking about, "Let's give the Nazis a platform!" The idea that it's somehow a net-positive to facilitate hate speech is patently absurd, pseudointellectual nonsense that nobody actually believes. These people want hate speech, and this is just a charade to justify it.
@jlsigman first they came for the nazis?
@jlsigman
Non olet.
@jlsigman Do you want Nazis? Because this is how you get Nazis.
@jlsigman “we don’t think it’s fair to us to not accept money from Nazis”
@jlsigman "censorship by not actively giving someone money" is a concept i hadn't heard of before
JR
@jlsigman I loath this cowardly, fence-sitting nonsense. The people holding this stance always believe they are smarter than both sides.
@jlsigman "Kicking the nazis out doesn't make the problem go away, so we should continue to let them promote themselves, make money (for both us and them), and organize."
@IntrepidVector @jlsigman yeah, I was like "how does forcing them underground and out of touch with each other make it WORSE?!?"
@ItsJenNotGoblin @jlsigman "Well, they wouldn't be making us money, for one."
They think "Surely none of them will ACTUALLY create any violence with their rhetoric, so the only real negative is having to put up with boorish racists yelling about minorities we don't care about"
@jlsigman the most lukewarm take ever from Substack wtf
like... Karl Popper? Do people not know the paradox of tolerance?
@jlsigman I mean, at least they're honest, I guess?
I have been very negative on substack for a long time, this is just one more reason to actively despise them.
@databu @jlsigman I don't think that's true though. I think the statement they made is even worse.
A lot of people do bad things for money, but I don't think these guys do it for money. They do it because they believe it's the right thing to do.
They literally say that platforming these people is better than not platforming them. They don't even use the excuse of "it's making us money, won't someone think of the shareholders?"
@databu @jlsigman Oh for sure. The effect is very clear.
I hope it was clear that I was being ironic when I said "at least..." as if it's a good thing. The way they are utterly unapologetic about the whole thing is quite horrible.
In fact, if they are lying about anything, I suspect it's the "we really don't like nazis, we promise" part.
@jlsigman I'm not sure that's news at this point. 
@jlsigman fucking fucks fucking sake fuck what the fuck
fuck this