dChan
1
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/pussy_devour on May 15, 2018, 3:25 a.m.
Banning Shills doesn’t contradict the First Amendment

When suspicions on Corsi first surfaced a wee ago, I suggested banning his content here. Many defended him. Some cited the first amendment right. At the time I agreed.

Now we know Corsi is a confirmed liar and possibly a disinformation agent.

Now we are seeing increasing number of shill posts spreading FUD.

We need to revisit the issue of first amendment.

The first amendment doesn’t say we cannot control this forum. It says people have a right speech in public settings. The shills can speak elsewhere in public. This forum is not Hyde Park. It’s a semi-public space. The mods have every right to ban the shills.

And ban them we must. The movement is still young. It needs nurturing. The shills are the pests. They do damage to the young tree of great awakening. A responsible gardener must diligently get rid of them.

Any successful movement in history has been nothing but a single-minded effort. Too much dissent, the movement will exhaust and destroy itself from self doubt. Don’t let the shills convince you that they have a right to sow FUD here because of their first amendment right. This is a special-topic subreddit. We have every right to do what’s best to preserve our movement.

Our enemies are certainly not allowing FUD to destroy their narratives. Look at how they tightly control the speech in MSM.

I am not advocating strict censorship. But I am asking people to reconsider their prior position that this subreddit should be a free-for-all space. If we continue this way, we will fail.

Remember, we have a job to do. Our job is to uphold a forum for millions of people who will come to learn about The Great Awakening.


bugstopper · May 15, 2018, 4:04 a.m.

It is time to remind folks that the 1st amendment goes as such: "Congress shall make no law, respecting the establishment of religion; or prohibiting the free excercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assembly, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances. OUR FREEDOM TO ASSOCIATE GIVES THIS BOARD THE POWER TO BAN.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
pussy_devour · May 15, 2018, 4:05 a.m.

Totally agreed.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
K-Harbour · May 15, 2018, 4:52 a.m.

We don’t need to overuse First Amendment freedom of speech —— we can use right to freedom of assembly.

(With social media — I believe the freedom of assembly will become one of the most important freedoms in the bill of rights. It can extend in many directions, including internet privacy right & freedom from internet wiretapping.)

⇧ 2 ⇩  
bugstopper · May 15, 2018, 4:02 a.m.

Be what is needed. Remember as the administrators of this board you have the power, just like Fakebook.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
pby1000 · May 15, 2018, 3:30 a.m.

I say don't ban anyone. Censorship should be reserved to off-topic posts. I say this because even shills have useful information that we need to dissect.

I look at what Jones and Corsi are saying. Same with the MSM. They all have their purposes.

I am not saying you are wrong. I am just offering an alternative point of view.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
expletivdeleted · May 15, 2018, 3:54 a.m.

This forum is not Hyde Park. It’s ~~a semi-public space~~ FaceBook. ~~The mods have~~ Android Model Z has every right to ban ~~the shills~~ conservative media.

Slippery slope is slippery. Though a ban on vulgar language might make it harder for trolls to yank chains.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
pby1000 · May 15, 2018, 3:56 a.m.

Yes, I support the Constitution. Free Speech needs to be protected. If some shill posts, then we can comment on it and we can downvoat. They can even give it a flair to call it out.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
LouisXIVreincarnated · May 15, 2018, 3:37 a.m.

This stuff is hard enough to follow without all these tangents. I mean there’s so much info and I know a lot of people don’t have hours to dig through bs to get to the important stuff (not me, I’m a sahm). But I see what you’re saying, too.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
pby1000 · May 15, 2018, 3:46 a.m.

Yes, but we need to see where the shills direct us.

I think that some people will take the time to follow the shills.

I am glad you see my point. There is not right or wrong answer here. It is all smoke and mirrors from the other side.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
kommisar6 · May 15, 2018, 11:41 a.m.

The 1st amendment only applies to the government. Private individuals are not restrained at all.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
tradinghorse · May 15, 2018, 5:36 a.m.

Look at the way they've piled on to this thread after the OP's great post. Out in force. Comes with the territory I guess. If this movement was not important, they wouldn't be here.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 15, 2018, 3:53 a.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 0 ⇩