The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

Post by wallace_f » Thu, Feb 02, 2017, 3:05 AM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #54

Brakenshire wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, in the same way that not inviting a neo-nazi or an anarcho-syndicalist, or a vegan, to talk on your radio programme is political censorship. Private people and organizations are well within their rights to set their own rules. If you want no moderation that's your choice, go to 4chan or a similar site.

Private people and organizations are well within their rights to set their own rules. Aren't we tired of saying this by now? That's fine, everyone can express her own views on Facebook, unless one is a Kurd who would like to say something about Kemal Atatürk? Should the Kurds have to create their own Facebook? Who's next, Trump voters? Do we really want them to sink further into their filter bubble? At some point a s…

Jessaustin that's a well written expression of that idea, thank you.

Post by sh_tinh_hair » Thu, Feb 02, 2017, 5:45 PM UTC

slededit wrote: post #101

sh_tinh_hair wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 70s when police officers carried a baton and a revolver you'd encounter a lot more talk, diplomacy and second chances. In the age of terrorism and tazers that has become rarer in my experience. Police officers need to have an 'edge' that is missing in normal people. Normalizing their experience with people and re-humanizing them isn't the best idea for their career and longevity in this day and age. Let them b…

That was dependent on who you were and the location. A long haired hippy was not getting many second chances in the south. Watch the movie Easy Rider as an example.

I don't need to watch a propaganda film to remember how it was. I was there. How old are you?

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity