Why do we need a platform like Fairtalk?
Unfortunately, we currently live in a time where we can't even rely on our leaders or governments to resolve any major issues peacefully. They always play their little games of politics & care more about preserving their positions of power instead of doing what's best for the majority. There's currently more than 13,000 nuclear warheads stockpiled & ready to be launched at any moment. This issue likely won't be solved by starting a protest & releasing our anger on the properties of business owners who are simply trying to earn a living like the rest of us. The world desperately needs a platform where we can all collectively communicate with each other & show to our leaders/governments that we're tired of fighting their wars, we're tired of the political division, we're tired of corruption, we're tired of seeing prices increase faster than our salaries, we're tired of poor leadership, etc.
Whether it's Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit or TikTok, all of these platforms use algorithms to suggest content for each individual user. This unfortunately divides everyone into their own little worlds and it simply becomes impossible to create any collective discussion. If we want a social media platform that impersonates a real life discussion where each person sits around a table and take turns exchanging thoughts & ideas, we can't have each user separated into their own worlds. Instead, we need to bring everyone together in the same room. Fairtalk does this by letting users collectively vote & decide which posts should be displayed to everyone else. In other words, the majority becomes the algorithm.
If we want to give everyone a fair chance to participate in Fairtalk's discussions, we had no choice but to remove the traditional "following" system. Although this system may have advantages, it unfortunately gives all the power/attention to only a small percentage of individuals (politicians, billionaires, actors, etc.) and if you're not apart of this small group of people, you'll almost certainly be ignored.
An argument against Fairtalk:
"Letting the majority vote & decide everything is nothing new. The concept of a democracy has been around ever since Ancient Greece. Looking at the current state of the world & knowing how chaotic it can become even under democracies, why would we ever want a social media platform that mimics such a system"?
Response to the argument:
Fairtalk's voting system works nothing like a democracy. Our platform gives each user the option to either up-vote, down-vote or neutral-vote (see Fairtalk's voting system below). Modern democracies unfortunately only give participants the option to "up-vote" leaders. But by also giving an option to down-vote, we can start filtering out the leaders or messages that always seem to divide us. If 51% of participants want a certain leader to be elected but the other 49% do not, why would we still elect this leader knowing that the entire country will be completely split in half? Why not simply use a voting system that can help us find leaders that people disagree with the least instead of always finding leaders that anger the other half the most?
Fairtalk's voting system:
• Up-vote: Increment a message's score by +1.
• Down-vote: Decrement a message's score by -1.
• Neutral-vote: No changes to a message's score.
* The score determines which messages will be shown to everyone else.
On Fairtalk, the majority votes & decides:
• Which new features should be implemented or removed from our platform.
• Which messages or polls should be Archived & seen by everyone else.
• Which keywords or subjects should be trending.
• And more.
Knowing that voting plays a crucial role into our platform's functionalities, we had to build a unique account verification system that helps eliminate all forms of voting manipulation. Verifying your account is not mandatory and it's completely free.
Unfortunately, we currently live in a time where we can't even rely on our leaders or governments to resolve any major issues peacefully. They always play their little games of politics & care more about preserving their positions of power instead of doing what's best for the majority. There's currently more than 13,000 nuclear warheads stockpiled & ready to be launched at any moment. This issue likely won't be solved by starting a protest & releasing our anger on the properties of business owners who are simply trying to earn a living like the rest of us. The world desperately needs a platform where we can all collectively communicate with each other & show to our leaders/governments that we're tired of fighting their wars, we're tired of the political division, we're tired of corruption, we're tired of seeing prices increase faster than our salaries, we're tired of poor leadership, etc.
Whether it's Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit or TikTok, all of these platforms use algorithms to suggest content for each individual user. This unfortunately divides everyone into their own little worlds and it simply becomes impossible to create any collective discussion. If we want a social media platform that impersonates a real life discussion where each person sits around a table and take turns exchanging thoughts & ideas, we can't have each user separated into their own worlds. Instead, we need to bring everyone together in the same room. Fairtalk does this by letting users collectively vote & decide which posts should be displayed to everyone else. In other words, the majority becomes the algorithm.
If we want to give everyone a fair chance to participate in Fairtalk's discussions, we had no choice but to remove the traditional "following" system. Although this system may have advantages, it unfortunately gives all the power/attention to only a small percentage of individuals (politicians, billionaires, actors, etc.) and if you're not apart of this small group of people, you'll almost certainly be ignored.
An argument against Fairtalk:
"Letting the majority vote & decide everything is nothing new. The concept of a democracy has been around ever since Ancient Greece. Looking at the current state of the world & knowing how chaotic it can become even under democracies, why would we ever want a social media platform that mimics such a system"?
Response to the argument:
Fairtalk's voting system works nothing like a democracy. Our platform gives each user the option to either up-vote, down-vote or neutral-vote (see Fairtalk's voting system below). Modern democracies unfortunately only give participants the option to "up-vote" leaders. But by also giving an option to down-vote, we can start filtering out the leaders or messages that always seem to divide us. If 51% of participants want a certain leader to be elected but the other 49% do not, why would we still elect this leader knowing that the entire country will be completely split in half? Why not simply use a voting system that can help us find leaders that people disagree with the least instead of always finding leaders that anger the other half the most?
Fairtalk's voting system:
• Up-vote: Increment a message's score by +1.
• Down-vote: Decrement a message's score by -1.
• Neutral-vote: No changes to a message's score.
* The score determines which messages will be shown to everyone else.
On Fairtalk, the majority votes & decides:
• Which new features should be implemented or removed from our platform.
• Which messages or polls should be Archived & seen by everyone else.
• Which keywords or subjects should be trending.
• And more.
Knowing that voting plays a crucial role into our platform's functionalities, we had to build a unique account verification system that helps eliminate all forms of voting manipulation. Verifying your account is not mandatory and it's completely free.
Show More
