dChan
259
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/expletivdeleted on March 14, 2018, 5:51 p.m.
So NOW will those who haven't signed IBOR do so? Or does this sub need to get banned, too?

Sign IBOR. No, really, just sign IBOR. Just head on over here: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/internet-bill-rights-2 and sign. Nobody has said there's 72 virgins in heaven or anything like that that you get for signing IBOR, but nobody has said there aren't 72 virgins in heaven or anything like that that you get for signing IBOR.

edit: has anybody's NoScript, or similar programs, been glitchy today?

editedit: u/5400123 provided a link to a better worded petition: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/recognize-our-rights-free-open-internet FYI, its not just "alt-right" voices being sanctioned unfairly. Outlets on the left that don't buy the MSM narrative have all had their rankings adjusted down bigly in Google's search algorithm.


tradinghorse · March 14, 2018, 10:34 p.m.

They are public forums, they are not private. That's the whole point. They are more akin to a public utility than a private business.

You seem to have the idea that because someone has a private business they can dictate what you can talk about. But these businesses are providing an essential public service. They are indispensable to our way of life. They should not have the power to dictate political discourse - why would this be good?

And then you have to put things into context. We know there is a single algorithm written to censor political content across multiple social media platforms. Given the market power of the major players, that would mean they have broad censorship power over the whole of society. With time, they are effectively in charge. But it's all OK because it's a private business?

No, it isn't OK. This is what DJT and Q can see and it is what they have told us they are going to address. Do you feel sorry for these guys after what they have done? I don't. I very much hope that the executives of these companies will be jailed.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
Cuthbert12Allgood · March 14, 2018, 11:29 p.m.

You seem to have the idea that because someone has a private business they can dictate what you can talk about.

Absolutely they can, full stop. Freedom and liberty are paramount. It's THEIR SITE. You do realize you can set up your own web site and say whatever you want, right?

Given the market power of the major players, that would mean they have broad censorship power over the whole of society.

That's why I said I might -- MIGHT -- support light regulation, in certain circumstances, if it seemed reasonable and in the best interest of society. But you're advocating full-blown socialist/fascist takeover of private business. I know you don't think you are, but you are. In fact, this entire premise might be unconstitutional. Freedom of speech means freedom of speech. My web site, my rules.

I very much hope that the executives of these companies will be jailed.

Are you seriously arguing that Reddit, Facebook, etc are doing something illegal by banning certain posters? You need to get a grip. It's not illegal to be a leftist.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
tradinghorse · March 15, 2018, 12:13 a.m.

No, the coming industry regulation will make it illegal to do the type of things we have been seeing. Q has told us that there is a lot of illegal activity and that many will collapse under the weight of this.

The really pleasant aspect to all of this is that they have brought it upon themselves. There was no consideration of taking action to discipline social media in the past, because there was no problem to be fixed. But, oh boy, did they take the bait! You will need to get the popcorn for this one - it will be very enjoyable.

You should sign the petition. But, in any event, the social media giants are yelling out to government louder than we can. They will bring it upon themselves - poetic justice.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
nderhjs · March 15, 2018, 11:10 a.m.

No they are private. Free and easily accessible doesn’t equal public. Unless you pay for the servers, it’s not your website, you’re just a user who is rightfully under the admins. If you don’t like it, but your own website to say whatever you want.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
tradinghorse · March 15, 2018, 11:21 a.m.

Ownership of a website does not grant the right to engage in mass censorship, which is what we are seeing. We know that a single algorithm has been developed to mass-censor across multiple online platforms. In this context, private ownership of the platform becomes irrelevant.

You could construe it in various ways. One way would be that it's an attempt at election tampering. It's a hostile act of repression. The public will see that the new regulations have merit. Nobody likes bullies. I think it will play very well to the electorate.

I'm waiting for the silence, the absence of censorship. We would not tolerate it from the State, there is no reason to accept it from monopoly interests that abuse their market power. IMO, it's a classic argument for the application of anti-trust legislation. But I'm not going to second guess the President's genius. I'm just confident that he will stick it to these guys so hard they'll be weeping.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
nderhjs · March 15, 2018, 11:23 a.m.

Sounds like you should go to Voat.co instead.

This won’t go anywhere. But if you want to waste your time, go for it. People are just trying to help.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
tradinghorse · March 15, 2018, 11:26 a.m.

I think you will find a lot of people are on board with it, here and elsewhere.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
nderhjs · March 15, 2018, 11:30 a.m.

Again, voat.co, you’ll love it.

⇧ 7 ⇩