FB messenger silently censoring links, claims they were sent

Post by eyelidlessness » Sun, Aug 29, 2021, 2:55 AM UTC

strken wrote: post #217

eyelidlessness wrote: post #169

I find it confusing that a community that frequently acknowledges that free services treat their users as the product simultaneously has expectations that the free service should amplify their speech. This, like many similar posts here, isn’t censorship. If you want to spread your idea (any idea at all) without hindrance, don’t do it on an advertisement platform.

It's censorship, and more specifically it's corporate censorship. When it comes to ranking a feed, you have more of an argument, but blocking direct and supposedly "private" messages on the basis of their content is censorship.

Post by cjaybo » Sun, Aug 29, 2021, 2:57 AM UTC

eyelidlessness wrote: post #239

roflc0ptic wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is your argument that this isn’t censorship? They’re providing a private chat platform and preventing certain messages from being sent. As far as I can tell this is the exact definition of censorship.

I don't need to make an argument that it isn't censorship. I'm not making the affirmative claim. If you're curious about how I arrived at a conclusion so easily: we're here discussing it openly on the public Internet.

Post by faeriechangling » Sun, Aug 29, 2021, 3:02 AM UTC

rnd0 wrote: post #190

faeriechangling wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shadow moderation became the norm ages ago to deal with spam. You can debate about its limits but somebody with a hardline position smacks of somebody who has never dealed with the real world issues but is cocksure about how things should be done.

>You can debate about its limits but somebody with a hardline position smacks of somebody who has never dealed with the real world issues but is cocksure about how things should be done. The canard about what happens when you assume applies in this case. Very much so. I've moderated forums and I've never had a problem with simply deleting spam out-right when it came up. Same with problematic users and posts.

Post by chillacy » Sun, Aug 29, 2021, 3:10 AM UTC

otterley wrote: post #184

JasonFruit wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should Facebook block every lie? Where exactly does that line fall? How, anyway, do you distinguish with certainty between a lie and a misunderstanding?

Why don’t we judge each action on its individual merits instead? Why can’t we simply say “yup, this site is a problem, nothing of value lost here” without worrying about whether they’re going to block speech about whether 2 or 3 teaspoons of yeast is the right amount to put in a loaf of bread, or whether my candidate for school board is better than yours? Let me be super clear here: nobody is entitled to use other pe…

Post by vdqtp3 » Sun, Aug 29, 2021, 3:28 AM UTC

inetknght wrote: post #248

It's been my experience that Google Voice also silences many of the links that I share with people. Ultimately I stopped sharing links over several third party services that I've used for years and have transitioned to other services instead.