The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last resort and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post,because such influence operation directed in us could give valuable clues about our enemies goals and plans about manipulating us.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases or those thing will be indistinguishable from more reliable research, able to cause problems. Probably more problems than trying to do counter-intelligence is worth.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last resort and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post,because such influence operation directed in us could give valuable clues about our enemies.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases or those thing will be indistinguishable from more reliable research, able to cause problems. Probably more problems than trying to do counter-intelligence is worth.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases or those thing will be indistinguishable from more reliable research, able to cause problems. Probably more problems than trying to do counter-intelligence is worth.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases or those thing will be indistinguishable from more reliable research, able to cause problems.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases or those thing will be indistinguishable from more reliable research

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe in free speech and suspect that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed. Having identified source of disinformation and observing it knowing who is it is quite good thing.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe,that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe,that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases. And moderation demands lot of work most of us not even notice by the way...

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe,that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically or by mods decision, so mods have to ban in most cases.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe,that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

From one side I deeply believe,that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

From another side: We know they are probably not reliable. Despite having many visitors we not have enough willing manpower to research all things. And we have no marking for marking doubtful information automatically.

The fact is u/Evspra found George news is reposting things and what is much,much more suspecious - using extreme leftist owned infrastructure.

So u/italianrose : I guess banning it was maybe quite much,but as some info cannot be just marked as "probably not legit" by mods,mods are banning.

Should they ban whole things in such situation ? I am not mod luckily,so I don't have to argue about shortcomings of infrastructure we have here...

The fact IS: George News should not be so trusted it was.

Was choice about banning it apropriate ? I don't know.

I however deeply believe,that banning them fully might generate problems because they should be researched still,but treated mostly like possible enemy disinformation. And as I know about disinformation a bit u/Evspra and we all shall remember one thing:

Arresting or killing proved enemy agent is last and worst choice counter-intelligence can do - done usually if other ways are closed.

If George news is not reliable then we were able (or able still) to get some intel about their purposes if we will verify,verify and verify things they post.

For now they are posting many "endorsements by Donald Trump". We shall maybe therefore check those people just in case and check from independent source do they are really endorsed. We shall not trust in George - but check them anyway would be good option.

As I said: until we or mods have no way of marking sources "probably not credible" banning it is hard but maybe still reasonable choice...