WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

380

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

I agree. I don't believe that sites with majority user-generated content can be permitted to remove or reduce the spread of lawful content without liability. Plugins and third party software can allow social media users to filter their own information.

The only censorship that's rightful and essential is "I'm not listening to you." It has to be individual-level controls. forcing someone to listen to something is just as bad as preventing them from hearing something. The founding fathers could not have possibly foreseen that freedom of speech protections would also need freedom of reach protections.

[–] 0 pt

I don't believe that sites with majority user-generated content can be permitted to remove or reduce the spread of lawful content without liability.

This is the simplest answer, yet becomes unfortunately impossibly complex when “bad actors” game the system. Solving that is the real hurdle. Parler’s attempt is to have people dox themselves, is it not? Attempted control by that method seemingly only allows those with resources (and power) to do the gaming. Is that better or worse?

The founding fathers were, above all, honorable. The entire American system was built on honor, and is woefully open for violation through dishonorable tactics and individuals. Most of the current crop of politicians would have been shot dead for their shit attacks on each other. Not by interlopers (which is inherently dishonorable) but by each other in an honorable duel.