Earlier quoted context omitted.
Among the millions of entries on the platform, not one single piece of content on the platform was presented as evidence for the ban decisions. Just ambiguous words or false claims. Shouldn't it be straightforward to prove that Eksi Sozluk lacks "meaningful moderation"? Shouldn't it be a requirement for such a drastic action like banning the whole web site? Twitter produces orders of magnitude more disinformation in…
It should be pretty straightforward for you to show you have any moderation whatsoever, I dont believe you do. The whole of the site is full of rubbish. If I were the Turkish government I would never even do the favour by banning the site, cause that draws attention the site doesn't deserve. I dont care if it's most visited site whatever, it's just useless.
No other popular social platform has this level of transparency. Not Twitter, not Reddit, not Facebook. How did they prove they have moderation to Turkish government? How do they not get banned?
Do you know?
Do you want to know?
Do you care about what's right or fair, or do you just believe in something and want to justify your beliefs in whatever means necessary?