I've included text alongside the picture so i could have an easier time sharing it.
what that shitty mod did here is considered libel in plenty countries; he's clearly acting on bad faith, claiming that someone would be a supporter of a crime, without a reason to claim so.
but hey, it's for "a greater cause", right? you can't let people to actually analyse what swartz said, his opinions shall be taboo! laws be damned, ethics be damned, just make sure to cover your tracks afterwards. /s
i don't even agree with swartz' views on pornography. pornography lacks a discourse; it's supposed to arouse the viewer/reader/whatever, and nothing else. it is not speech.
I've included text alongside the picture so i could have an easier time sharing it.
what that shitty mod did here is considered libel in plenty countries; he's clearly acting on bad faith, claiming that someone would be a supporter of a crime, without a reason to claim so.
but hey, it's for "a greater cause", right? you can't let people to actually analyse what swartz said, his opinions shall be taboo! laws be damned, ethics be damned, just make sure to cover your tracks afterwards. /s
i don't even agree with swartz' views on pornography. pornography lacks a discourse; it's supposed to arouse the viewer/reader/whatever, and nothing else. it is not speech.
(post is archived)