11–20 of 83 posts
I didn't know much about Dissenter until I Googled it just now, and it looks like its audience is primarily folk on the far/alt-right. Hell, it was created by Gab[1]. Given the rhetoric that is often found in comments from those groups, it's not too hard to imagine that the complaints Mozilla cited as the reasons for removal are legitimate. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network)#Dissenter
I didn't know much about Dissenter until I Googled it just now, and it looks like its audience is primarily folk on the far/alt-right. Hell, it was created by Gab[1]. Given the rhetoric that is often found in comments from those groups, it's not too hard to imagine that the complaints Mozilla cited as the reasons for removal are legitimate. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network)#Dissenter
Gab is not a far/alt right specific platform. It's just a place where you can say whatever you want.
Problem is the left calls far right or offensive to anything they disagree with.
If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. This is so obviously not an issue of "free speech." Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, and that's the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much.
> Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. No, that's the 1st amendment of the US constitution. Free speech is a broader concept, and the 1st amendment defends it only from government interference.
Censorship not necessarily equal government censorship, and its ludicrous that people seem to assume it does.
If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. This is so obviously not an issue of "free speech." Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, and that's the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much.
That only shows that reception to what is being said is overwhelmingly negative. Society has an unfortunate long history of doing that for arbitrary and stupid things. There are legitimate reasons for using something like this.
Granted with the "alt-right" it is a clear case of "They laughed at Einstein but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown".
I can't help but think it is a shame that an overlay messageboard concept like that wound up being used in a double rot13 cryptofascist dumpster fire. Although it would probably always tend toward toxicity given its usefulness for hatedoms of any sort.
I'm imagining a useful fact checker one slapped over news websites and even maintaining "score" of accuracy per author, site, and topic.
I didn't know much about Dissenter until I Googled it just now, and it looks like its audience is primarily folk on the far/alt-right. Hell, it was created by Gab[1]. Given the rhetoric that is often found in comments from those groups, it's not too hard to imagine that the complaints Mozilla cited as the reasons for removal are legitimate. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network)#Dissenter
[flagged]
If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. This is so obviously not an issue of "free speech." Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, and that's the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much.
> If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. That only shows that reception to what is being said is overwhelmingly negative. Society has an unfortunate long history of doing that for arbitrary and stupid things. There are legitimate reasons for using something like this. Granted with the "alt-right" it i…
Off topic, but I don't think they laughed at Einstein. Special and general relativity were well received by the scientific community, weren't they?
I didn't know much about Dissenter until I Googled it just now, and it looks like its audience is primarily folk on the far/alt-right. Hell, it was created by Gab[1]. Given the rhetoric that is often found in comments from those groups, it's not too hard to imagine that the complaints Mozilla cited as the reasons for removal are legitimate. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network)#Dissenter
[flagged]
Far-left / Socialist is the only "acceptable" way of thinking
anything Libertarian, (which is labeled "far-right" now) should be shut down, out, and banned
If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. This is so obviously not an issue of "free speech." Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, and that's the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much.
Incorrect, very very very incorrect
I am alarmed by the fact that people believe the only censorship by government is a problem or what "free speech" means.
A society can be completely devoid of free speech while not having any government censorship at all. We are seeing the manifestation of such a society today.
Government censorship is only one kind, and only 1 threat to free speech, but it is far far far from the only threat.
> Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though,
Yes, yes they can. But if they do they should not be able to advertise, collect money, and promote being "for everyone" or "adovating for the free and open web" or other such statements. That is and should be considered fraud if they do such things.
If Mozilla wants to be a censorship platform, they need to own it in their marketing, mission statement, and public advocacy
> the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much.
It is always amusing with Authoritarian and socialist promote the "free market" when it comes to censorship when in reality they have not idea what they are talking about
If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. This is so obviously not an issue of "free speech." Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, and that's the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much.
> If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. That only shows that reception to what is being said is overwhelmingly negative. Society has an unfortunate long history of doing that for arbitrary and stupid things. There are legitimate reasons for using something like this. Granted with the "alt-right" it i…
Do you know, personally, if these messages where the "majority" of the content or do you believe if even a single one of these "rot13 cryptofascist dumpster fire" messages where posted anywhere on the network that is justification for a complete ban?
Do believe companies like Mozilla should be uphold legal speech as it pertains to US Laws (as mozilla is a US Company) or should they impose greater censorship over everything that flows through their web browser, picking and choosing what is "acceptable"