Elon Musk should buy Actualized

[xbcc]

21 hours ago, NoSelfSelf said:

Do you understand what would happen to this forum if there are no censoring ?

From what I see anything that goes against his world view is not allowed here. Like arguments against vaccination for example.

He banned a user who was sharing very valuable information because that user did not agree with Leo on something. I think the disagreement was about love or something. Can't remember properly.

The user has a youtube channel called sifting to truth. One of the most valuable practical teachings for me so far.

I don't think total free speech is realistic either, but as much as possible should be allowed without hurting others. Vaccination should be allowed to be discussed. Trump should be allowed to be discussed. From what I know no war happened when Trump was in power. But look at all the other presidents.

FYI I'm no fan of elon musk either.

Edited April 22, 2022 by xbcc

[Leo Gura]

Yes, my value system and ethics sets the direction for this forum. If you don't like my value system or sense of ethics feel free to join another online community who's ethics you agree with it.

Not allowing the spread of misinformation about public health is a value I hold.

[xbcc]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes, my value system and ethics sets the direction for this forum. If you don't like my value system or sense of ethics feel free to join another online community who's ethics you agree with it.

Not allowing the spread of misinformation about public health is a value I hold.

What makes you think that you know the absolute truth about vaccination?

I've learned so much from you, you really opened my eyes on what spirituality is. But your censorship makes me lose trust.

[xbcc]

On 4/21/2022 at 6:25 PM, zurew said:

How many valuable things you couldn't share, because you were afraid of moderation?

Can you point out any high quality forum or platform, where there is no moderation?

I'm not active on the forum, sometimes I pass by to read.

I'm not active in any other communities, besides crypto. So can't recommend anything. 

[Amit]

@Leo Gura  As a self help guru and as an inspiration for the teachings etc you have made an impact for sure.

But I would like to bring your attention to the forum becoming a huge distraction for sincere seekers instead of a support.

also I don’t like the fact that it’s a huge deal to remove your account and data, once you have joined the community, I have messaged @Leo Gura to remove my account for a week and he seems to avoid it without any response at all.

do you think it’s okay to make people feel like they are trapped once they are in, just because you want to increase your business numbers ?

I think Leo doesn’t have understanding of what he preaches, he doesn’t care about personal freedom of choice of others.

[Rokazulu]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes, my value system and ethics sets the direction for this forum. If you don't like my value system or sense of ethics feel free to join another online community who's ethics you agree with it.

Not allowing the spread of misinformation about public health is a value I hold.

I would question the value of it.
Joining an echo chamber of ideas would be easy enough, but I see no value in that.
There is no progress to be made with this perspective.

In a discussion of ideas, one has to provide reasons as to why information is being misinterpreted (or is inaccurate) so that others may understand and come to the same conclusion. If dialogue becomes ad hominem and no constructive sharing is being had by specific users, then of course dealing with those specific users for not providing their perspective respectfully, is just moderation. But, shutting down an entire thread of ideas, every time someone shares their perspective in good faith— is censorship.

 

Edited April 22, 2022 by Rokazulu

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, xbcc said:

What makes you think that you know the absolute truth about vaccination?

I never claimed I do. But decisions must be made regardless. Welcome to life.

Quote

But your censorship makes me lose trust.

Good! Too much trust in me is not good for you.

33 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

I would question the value of it.
Joining an echo chamber of ideas would be easy enough, but I see no value in that.

We don't need to open this community to anti-vaxism. It would only make the community worse.

This community gets better with more "censorship" than when I let anything slide. Good people don't want to be part of a community full of right-wing nonsense, conspiracy theories, and bad information.

 I have tried both approaches and experience has taught me that being too strict is better than being too lax. Once you run a community of your own you will understand this and until then you probably won't. Running an online community requires some specialized knowledge. Having 5 years of experience doing it every day, it's clear to me that Elon Musk doesn't have that experience and so his idea of how to create a good online community isn't worth much.

Letting Trump back on Twitter is such a dumb idea. It does not serve society.

[Michael569]

On 21/04/2022 at 5:03 PM, xbcc said:

but with the amount of censoring that Leo does, it's hard to have trust in the direction of this forum. Truth can not be sustained if free speech is prohibited

Do an experiment, go to Dan Bilzerian's Facebook page and look in the comments of any of his posts. This is what this forum would become in 12 months without moderation & sensible amount of censorship. 

 

[Rokazulu]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

We don't need to open this community to anti-vaxism. It would only make the community worse.

This community gets better with more "censorship" than when I let anything slide. Good people don't want to be part of a community full of right-wing nonsense, conspiracy theories, and bad information.

 I have tried both approaches and experience has taught me that being too strict is better than being too lax. Once you run a community of your own you will understand this and until then you probably won't.

You're assuming more information/discussion about the vaccine is anti-vax. I would think it would be pro-vax so that science could improve their methodology.

Less controversy, doesn't mean it is getting better. It means it is becoming stagnant. I am sure folks that view Nazism as a good thing; believe their forum is getting better too— every time they ban any dissenting opinion that could actually provide them a way out of their divisive thought.




 

Edited April 22, 2022 by Rokazulu

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Rokazulu said:

You're assuming more information/discussion about the vaccine is anti-vax.

It's not a matter of pro or anti vax. It's a matter of accurate vs inaccurate information and distorted ways of thinking and talking about the information.

People come here and post some random example of someone getting a bad reaction from the vaccine as though this means no one should get vaccinated. Cases like these are unscientific and lead to senseless fearmongering. Allowing such flagrantly unintelligent takes only poisons the discourse by "flooding the zone with shit".

The science on the Covid vaccines is extremely clear and positive, despite whatever minor issues.

For the same reasons I'm not going to allow people to come here and argue about the science on global warming, etc.

Lines have to be drawn somewhere.

[Rokazulu]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

It's not a matter of pro or anti vax. It's a matter of accurate vs inaccurate information and distorted ways of thinking and talking about the information.

People come here and post some random example of someone getting a bad reaction from the vaccine as though this means no one should get vaccinated. Cases like these are unscientific and lead to senseless fearmongering. Allowing such flagrantly unintelligent takes only poisons the discourse by "flooding the zone with shit".

The science on the Covid vaccines is extremely clear and positive, despite whatever minor issues.

For the same reasons I'm not going to allow people to come here and argue about the science on global warming, etc.

Lines have to be drawn somewhere.

Yes, but if there are examples of the vaccine causing problems with people, then that is a serious over-sight to sweep under the rug, and is in of itself— unscientific. Especially, if there is allergic reactions to the chemicals used. Pharmaceutical companies have no liability when it comes to these vaccines (at least in America, not so much in India and other locations). Not only that, but the subject of how to maintain a healthy immune system is also a factor in the discussion of what works and what does not, in the treatment of disease. Placebo also plays a factor.

There has to be some sort of recognition of why the science is inaccurate in order to refute it. Calling it a "lie" or "misinformation" is akin to forming a conspiracy theory if there is no discussion about why, specifically it is inaccurate.

Thank God, science didn't end with doctors saying it was healthy to "smoke cigarettes" for example. This is a new experimental drug. Hundreds of drugs are taken off the market because of later data showing the adverse effects outweigh the benefits. Which is a positive thing. Not fear-mongering, just common sense corrective behavior in how science functions.

It would be good to not allow people to walk away with distorted views.

Edited April 22, 2022 by Rokazulu

[yetineti]

Actualized.org has never been a place to give Truth or uphold a free place to speak.

It has been a place to lead us to Truth and it turns out that doesn’t require the ability to talk about anything we want.

It actually needs focus.

Most of the censoring here has been political or obvious. Say what you will about the politics, it’s not really even needed here anyways. But, sure I do not always agree with some locked threads. Other than that, mostly, the censoring has been reasonable.

I get the disdain though. I’d just say, Leo’s game here is fun. Play by his rules a bit, might not be for you but, for some things, it is highly effective.

Also, there’s always Reddit, open browsers and Facebook.

Just be careful though, I bet I could find some words you’d want to censor too.

Not a threat, love you, just an acknowledgment. But, I’ve made grown men cry. Ones would would’ve ‘talked about anything.’ 

Edited April 22, 2022 by mw711

[Rokazulu]

19 minutes ago, mw711 said:

Actualized.org has never been a place to give Truth or uphold a free place to speak.

It has been a place to lead us to Truth and it turns out that doesn’t require the ability to talk about anything we want.

Also, there’s always Reddit, open browsers and Facebook.

Just be careful though, I bet I could find some words you’d want to censor too.

Not a threat, love you, just an acknowledgment. But, I’ve made grown men cry. Ones would would’ve ‘talked about anything.’ 

Why is censorship good if it has been proven to radicalize people, create more division among the population and create extremists?

Reddit and Facebook have participated in some censorship as well, so they are not much of an alternative. How is any kind of authoritarianism positive?

Edited April 22, 2022 by Rokazulu

[zurew]

8 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

Yes, but if there are examples of the vaccine causing problems with people, then that is a serious over-sight to sweep under the rug, and is in of itself— unscientific.

Can you think of any drug/vaccine that worked 100% for everyone  and had no bad effect on anyone? That standard that a vaccine that was given for billions of people should not have a single bad case is really absurd. You could give a potato for billions of people and you would see how many people would have bad reactions to it.

10 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

There has to be some sort of recognition of why the science is inaccurate in order to refute it.

Call it out how it is inaccurate, and provide a better solution that works for billions of people better than the vaccine. Providing a better solution is the real challenge, because you can't just rely on your own anecdotal experience but you need to provide one that works for most people, has lower harm causality than the vaccine, and has better effectiveness.

11 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

This is a new experimental drug. Hundreds of drugs are taken off the market because of later data showing the adverse effects outweigh the benefits.

This vaccine had been tested over billions of patients, and we are talking about it like its a totally new thing and we are talking about it like we have  no data on it.

 

I think the most criticism you can do is to say that there should have been more focus on what one can do to improve their immunesystem by improving diet, working out etc.

 However, to jump and think that you can replace the vaccine with that, requires a lot of data and statistics and not just anecdotal exp. 

 

 

17 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

Why is censorship good if it has been proven to radicalize people, create more division among the population and create extremists?

Reddit and Facebook have participated in some heavy censorship as well, so they are not much of an alternative. How is any kind of authoritarianism positive?

Having reasonable regulations have more benefits than negatives. The biggest problem is drawing the lines, and clarifying in an exact way those regulations. But the hardness of clarification does not mean, that we shouldn't have any regulations though.

For instance think about having a regulation that one can only share factually correct information, or if you are not sure about it, you have to clarify it beforehand that you are not sure if it is correct or not. Just this one rule could uplift a forum / platform in a huge way. The sensemaking would be much better and easier, and noone would need to spend hours to puzzle out, if the information has some validity or how much validity that particular narrative / information has.

[Rokazulu]

49 minutes ago, zurew said:

Can you think of any drug/vaccine that worked 100% for everyone  and had no bad effect on anyone? That standard that a vaccine that was given for billions of people should not have a single bad case is really absurd. You could give a potato for billions of people and you would see how many people would have bad reactions to it.

Call it out how it is inaccurate, and provide a better solution that works for billions of people better than the vaccine. Providing a better solution is the real challenge, because you can't just rely on your own anecdotal experience but you need to provide one that works for most people, has lower harm causality than the vaccine, and has better effectiveness.

This vaccine had been tested over billions of patients, and we are talking about it like its a totally new thing and we are talking about it like we have  no data on it.

I think the most criticism you can do is to say that there should have been more focus on what one can do to improve their immunesystem by improving diet, working out etc.

 However, to jump and think that you can replace the vaccine with that, requires a lot of data and statistics and not just anecdotal exp.

Having reasonable regulations have more benefits than negatives. The biggest problem is drawing the lines, and clarifying in an exact way those regulations. But the hardness of clarification does not mean, that we shouldn't have any regulations though.

For instance think about having a regulation that one can only share factually correct information, or if you are not sure about it, you have to clarify it beforehand that you are not sure if it is correct or not. Just this one rule could uplift a forum / platform in a huge way. The sensemaking would be much better and easier, and noone would need to spend hours to puzzle out, if the information has some validity or how much validity that particular narrative / information has.

Yes, but that takes us to the idea of whether or not the risk is worth the "reward". Many doctors are now saying that everyone will get the COVID virus. It will eventually spread to everyone.

This is proving to be true as more and more triple vaccinated individuals are caught with the virus. Why would anyone still need to get the vaccine, as it has been proven not to be a vaccine in the traditional sense (provide immunity to the virus), but instead is claimed to now have only a certain" protection" from the virus. Two different things. But, the protection has proven to not work either. So it no longer even has a benefit. Therefore, why risk the side effects of the vaccine (which ranges from stiff necks, extreme swelling, to myocarditis and pericarditis). If you will get COVID anyways?

The solution, I already provided in the health section, is what immunologists are taught in university and have been saying for years. A healthy immune system. What they haven't been saying for years, is the new data on how to obtain a healthier immune system.

Appeal to authority makes no sense in a discussion.  Factually correct information has to be proven. People have to understand why it is a fact, not assume it is one. Everyone has to be involved or it can easily turn into an echo chamber of ideas.






 

Edited April 22, 2022 by Rokazulu

[hoodrow trillson]

A lot of coping ITT about thinking you know more about the vaccine by googling shit than actual scientists who have given their lives to study virology and medicine.  Oh wait, that doesn't matter; who is paying them right?  

[Rokazulu]

6 minutes ago, hoodrow trillson said:

A lot of coping ITT about thinking you know more about the vaccine by googling shit than actual scientists who have given their lives to study virology and medicine.  Oh wait, that doesn't matter; who is paying them right?  

Well, I don't really need to go into the motive. But, can you speak about any of the points or are you just venting? Your argument is an appeal to authority and didn't quite speak about any of the statements I have made. I am not judging you for this, and I am not angry that you made it. Just consider why you made that statement towards me instead of towards the ideas I am speaking of.

Edited April 22, 2022 by Rokazulu

[vladorion]

Can someone tell me at least one good reason to vaccinate children who are at pretty much zero risk of dying from covid and most of whom have already been exposed to the virus?

[vladorion]

9 minutes ago, hoodrow trillson said:

A lot of coping ITT about thinking you know more about the vaccine by googling shit than actual scientists who have given their lives to study virology and medicine.  Oh wait, that doesn't matter; who is paying them right?  

Scientists are not always right about everything. Do you know how many times science has been wrong?

And yes, you're foolish to fully trust scientists that work for (or are affiliated with) corporations where billions of dollars are to be made and which are connected to the WEF, who are very open about 'using a good crisis' to push their agenda.

[zurew]

 

40 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

This is proving to be true as more and more triple vaccinated individuals are caught with the virus.  as it has been proven not to be a vaccine in the traditional sense (provide immunity to the virus), but instead is claimed to now have only a certain" protection" from the virus. Two different things.

There is a lower chance to get the virus if you are vaccinated. Lower chance matters a lot, when we are talking about hospitals getting flooded with people ,so other people with issues that is not covid related, can't get sufficient health care.

Again getting back to your original point of "if something is not 100% effective than it need to be thrown out" i think thats not a very good way to evaluate things, since i haven't seen any vaccine or drug that was 100% effective for everyone and in every instance.

49 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

But, the protection has proven to not work either. So it no longer even has a benefit.

It hasn't been proven that it doesn't work. Thats a claim that need to be backed up by data and statistics. Also if it has absolutely no benefit whatsoever, then why most countries are still buying vaccines?

52 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

Therefore, why risk the side effects of the vaccine (which ranges from stiff necks, extreme swelling, to myocarditis and pericarditis). If you will get COVID anyways?

I got tripple vaxxed, havent had any of the simptons that you mentioned above. You will get the covid, but i guess it matters to you how severly it will run through you, right?

54 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

Appeal to authority makes no sense in a discussion.  Factually correct information has to be proven. People have to understand why it is a fact, not assume it is one. Everyone has to be involved or it can easily turn into an echo chamber of ideas.

Appeal to authority makes a lot of sense, when we are talking about issues, that most of us have no idea how to make sense of. How many peer reviewed papers have you read, and how many could you make total sense of without prior medical studies/knowledge? There is no way, that you won't make some %-of appealing to authorities when we are talking about medical issues.

 

56 minutes ago, Rokazulu said:

The solution, I already provided in the health section, is what immunologists are taught in university and have been saying for years. A healthy immune system. What they haven't been saying for years, is the new data on how to obtain a healthier immune system.

A healthy immune system sounds great on paper, but when we are talking about humanity, you will find people with thousands of issues, and you can't just make a protocol that will work for billions of people regarding to the healthy immune system approach. Also just by having a healthy immune system that does not mean, that you won't go to the hospital when you catch the virus. There were a number of strong people who had a good healthy immune system, and they were working out a lot and even went for competitions but unfortunately some of them had to go to the hospital. So you can reduce you chance of getting into a hospital if you get a healthy immune system, but its nowhere near bulletproof.

Also how realistic it is for society, especially when we are talking about the breakout of the virus, to just quickly change their whole life around, quickly eat healthier ,quickly start working out and so on and so forth. People been getting the 'just get healthier' advice in their life all the time, but most don't want to change or can't change. If you only relying on the immune system part you will count out a lot of people in society.

So the vaccines are  a free quick solution where you can get protection to people who don't want to , or for those who can't get a healthier immune system.