21–30 of 550 posts
I assume this is a mistake, although I think they're mad I don't think the SWP are malicious a la some political sects
I can't find any specifics on the position they hold, but the UK is pretty much in line with the US on mask mandates and lockdowns in hotspots.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook has been around since 2004, that excuse must have been used before.
I'm sure it has. Perhaps a more recent "revolutionary event" in the USA has prompted a change in automated filtering. Just a hunch though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is how the right has been feeling for a while. This is nothing new behaviour-wise for Facebook, the only difference is this gets more favourable media attention.
Please, don't draw a false equivalency between a major political party that does not play host to violent rhetoric, on the one hand, and groups that where plans (very real, actionable, and actioned-on plans!) to subvert the government are incubated, on the other. Put another way--let's not turn sedition into another us-vs-them political game. That's how democracy ends.
ETA: to quantify that a bit, in the 2010 General Election the SWP ran as part of the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition. Nationally that coalition received 0.04% of votes cast. I can't find any indication that they even put up any candidates in subsequent elections.
Well, Facebook is run by the far right, like Peter Thiel so no wonder.
Facebook is absolutely dominated by the far-right, which is why left-wing groups, pages, and users are being censored en-masse. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is how the right has been feeling for a while. This is nothing new behaviour-wise for Facebook, the only difference is this gets more favourable media attention.
Please, don't draw a false equivalency between a major political party that does not play host to violent rhetoric, on the one hand, and groups that where plans (very real, actionable, and actioned-on plans!) to subvert the government are incubated, on the other. Put another way--let's not turn sedition into another us-vs-them political game. That's how democracy ends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook is a private platform: they're free to block any content they want, malicious or not.
They are also mainly motivated by money, which allows us to make at least educated guesses as to what happened in matters like these
Edit: For those unaware, this is the devil's advocate take. HN has been remarkably pro-corporate censorship lately, and only a matter of weeks later its coming back to bite pro-censorship advocates.
There was also a historical re-enactment page removed in December because they had militia in their title [1] Looks to just be an over-eager moderation engine. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-dorset-55215949
Computing systems are do not act on their own. That the system did this was because it was allowed to, or more accurately, told to.
I assume this is a mistake, although I think they're mad I don't think the SWP are malicious a la some political sects
Yes, it seems unlikely this is deliberate. The SWP is about as likely to forment a revolution or incite violence as Judi Dench. They're a bunch of harmless eccentrics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are also mainly motivated by money, which allows us to make at least educated guesses as to what happened in matters like these
That's irrelevant, because a private company can't be compelled to support someone else's speech against their will. If you don't like it, then take political action. Edit: For those unaware, this is the devil's advocate take. HN has been remarkably pro-corporate censorship lately, and only a matter of weeks later its coming back to bite pro-censorship advocates.