What if the government outlaws "Q discussion"? Isn't that illegal content, then, too? Isn't that content someone has subjectively decided isn't safe for you (or others)?
What about in the context of sharing the proof of Joe or Hunter Biden's depravity? I'm not saying I want to see it, but hypothetically speaking, shouldn't the same argument apply? Just because someone else has decided it isn't safe for me to see I shouldn't be able to see it?
Do you get what I'm saying? It's not as black and white as you're making it out to be. There isn't censorship or non-censorship. There's nuance. This forum was created with a purpose; the moderators are attempting to ensure that the forum remains focused to that purpose. If you doubt it, you can look back at their previous statements and/or the publicly available moderator logs.
Links are the only thing that are against the current rules. You are still allowed to talk about GN all you'd like.
Nobody has decided you can't go look at George News... not even Google, oddly enough. If you apply the rules of this forum to your life you have a lot of issues; if you don't, you'll realize that the rules of this forum and their enforcement do not at all hinder your freedom of speech or freedom of expression as constitutionally outlined. This forum isn't your property; if you want to have a forum where everything is allowed go to a different one, or make your own.
Are you even American? Your first point cannot be made to be illegal because it is a violation of freedom of speech and is therefore unconstitutional.
Censorship is censorship brotha, especially when it’s done in the same vein that MSM does it.
If I am reading your point correctly, what you’re basically saying, this forum is the same as every other big tech social media company, so if you don’t like it, go make your own. Right? “So what? We censor the content you post, but you can still visit it off site!” Lmao.
Yes, I will go to better platforms. Evaporated has ruined this place but also pulled back the veil on the commies that exist here.
Yes. Do you even understand that the government no longer gives a shit about the constitution? Legality isn't so simple as "I believe the constitution guarantees me the right to talk about it, so it's legal". We had a process for addressing the finer points of the law, and the legality of new laws, but that process has completely broken down. Therefore, the argument that "Illegal content is differentiated from content SOMEONE has subjectively decided isn't safe for me to see" falls apart. Define illegal content?!
This "censorship" isn't even remotely close to the same vein as the MSM. The MSM will ban DISCUSSION on top of links, and they won't stop there. They will hunt you down and ban you from literally everything they can. This forum will do no such thing.
There are "jurisdictions" to this all. There were laws before it became apparent that they would not be applied equally. Companies have the right to restrict your access to their platform, IF it is a private platform, NOT receiving the respective government benefits and protections of a sanctioned open-forum. Big tech claims to be an open forum, meaning they receive government benefits, but they are also supposed to be subject to the constitution rigidly. If they ceased receiving those government benefits, and actually followed their user contract instead of banning people for things that are not violations of that contract, they would have every right to censor you, on their platform, as communities.win in general does. They do not do this; they illegally censor, and they go well beyond their own jurisdiction to get you fired from any job, to dox you, and to, in general, ruin and unperson you. Unlike with this website, they will not just stop you from linking to the content, they will seek to destroy the content entirely as well, to prevent anyone from accessing it in any way.
To compare the actions of the moderators on this website to the actions of big tech is, frankly, absurd.
Not all censorship is bad. I, for one, support the censorship of child pornography. I support dedicated forums censoring to maintain the purpose of their forum. There is a time and a place for everything, and there are more rights than simply the right to freedom of expression. In some instances, these other rights supersede the freedom of expression. If they did not, there could be no justice.
What if the government outlaws "Q discussion"? Isn't that illegal content, then, too? Isn't that content someone has subjectively decided isn't safe for you (or others)?
What about in the context of sharing the proof of Joe or Hunter Biden's depravity? I'm not saying I want to see it, but hypothetically speaking, shouldn't the same argument apply? Just because someone else has decided it isn't safe for me to see I shouldn't be able to see it?
Do you get what I'm saying? It's not as black and white as you're making it out to be. There isn't censorship or non-censorship. There's nuance. This forum was created with a purpose; the moderators are attempting to ensure that the forum remains focused to that purpose. If you doubt it, you can look back at their previous statements and/or the publicly available moderator logs.
Links are the only thing that are against the current rules. You are still allowed to talk about GN all you'd like.
Nobody has decided you can't go look at George News... not even Google, oddly enough. If you apply the rules of this forum to your life you have a lot of issues; if you don't, you'll realize that the rules of this forum and their enforcement do not at all hinder your freedom of speech or freedom of expression as constitutionally outlined. This forum isn't your property; if you want to have a forum where everything is allowed go to a different one, or make your own.
Are you even American? Your first point cannot be made to be illegal because it is a violation of freedom of speech and is therefore unconstitutional.
Censorship is censorship brotha, especially when it’s done in the same vein that MSM does it.
If I am reading your point correctly, what you’re basically saying, this forum is the same as every other big tech social media company, so if you don’t like it, go make your own. Right? “So what? We censor the content you post, but you can still visit it off site!” Lmao.
Yes, I will go to better platforms. Evaporated has ruined this place but also pulled back the veil on the commies that exist here.
Yes. Do you even understand that the government no longer gives a shit about the constitution? Legality isn't so simple as "I believe the constitution guarantees me the right to talk about it, so it's legal". We had a process for addressing the finer points of the law, and the legality of new laws, but that process has completely broken down. Therefore, the argument that "Illegal content is differentiated from content SOMEONE has subjectively decided isn't safe for me to see" falls apart. Define illegal content?!
This "censorship" isn't even remotely close to the same vein as the MSM. The MSM will ban DISCUSSION on top of links, and they won't stop there. They will hunt you down and ban you from literally everything they can. This forum will do no such thing.
There are "jurisdictions" to this all. There were laws before it became apparent that they would not be applied equally. Companies have the right to restrict your access to their platform, IF it is a private platform, NOT receiving the respective government benefits and protections of a sanctioned open-forum. Big tech claims to be an open forum, meaning they receive government benefits, but they are also supposed to be subject to the constitution rigidly. If they ceased receiving those government benefits, and actually followed their user contract instead of banning people for things that are not violations of that contract, they would have every right to censor you, on their platform, as communities.win in general does. They do not do this; they illegally censor, and they go well beyond their own jurisdiction to get you fired from any job, to dox you, and to, in general, ruin and unperson you. Unlike with this website, they will not just stop you from linking to the content, they will seek to destroy the content entirely as well, to prevent anyone from accessing it in any way.
To compare the actions of the moderators on this website to the actions of big tech is, frankly, absurd.
Not all censorship is bad. I, for one, support the censorship of child pornography. I support dedicated forums censoring to maintain the purpose of their forum. There is a time and a place for everything, and there are more rights than simply the right to freedom of expression. In some instances, these other rights supersede the freedom of expression. If they did not, there could be no justice.