As for banning, we can do that too but only in the communities we moderate - of course.
Banning is another (in many ways the ultimate) form of censorship that I detest. I use it only as a last resort when sparing the rod is spoiling the child, and am quick to offer amnesty and forgiveness for those that earnestly seek it.
There's a difference between freedom of speech and starting shit for no reason.
Not if that "starting shit" is simply free speech. Arguably there is a reason, we presume bennington is capable of such higher cognition - though there IS reason to doubt it.
Putting a megaphone in public and saying 'nigger nigger' is not the same as
I agree, but noise ordinance laws will often take care of that megaphone - leaving you with just the free speech.
breaking someone's window and directing it into their house.
Again, vandalism should cover that. Their freedom to unencumbered speech is and should be guaranteed, their right to noise pollute and vandalism - not so much.
I hear you, and it does feel a bit like they "kicked in the door to your hovel" - and certainly hacking conpro (assuming that happened) is an example of that for which they arguably should face punishment. Likewise the repeated harassment of users through clear and wonton abuse of the tag function, and the express/ostensible intent to dox and harass users whose names they collected here ought to equally be swiftly punished.
Still, the right to come here, start shit, and collect usernames (without explicitly announcing plans to use them for illegal purposes) ought to be fine. That's all freedom of speech, and freely available information.
We are equally free to brigade the shit out of them, make endless work for them and their mod teams, express our displeasure in almost any way we please (as long as it is through our shared freedom of speech) and by far the best approach - block, ignore, and report them til the cows come home.
Always starve a troll. They thrive on conflict. (Or give them heaping helpings of kindness; they can't tolerate it.)
Now now, freedom of speech is a two way street!
I know you WANT to censor bennington, but you can't if you really hate censorship...
Do you see the paradox of your position?
Anyhow, trolls gonna troll. Whatchu gonna do?
I hate anti white racists and want to ban those from my community.
And we have the right and ability to do it!
As for banning, we can do that too but only in the communities we moderate - of course.
Banning is another (in many ways the ultimate) form of censorship that I detest. I use it only as a last resort when sparing the rod is spoiling the child, and am quick to offer amnesty and forgiveness for those that earnestly seek it.
as long as you are against anti white racists
I am against all "racism" and more importantly pride/elitism/ignorance[evil] that is intended to be fostered/encouraged through its advertisement.
I am against slavers.
There's a difference between freedom of speech and starting shit for no reason.
Putting a megaphone in public and saying 'nigger nigger' is not the same as breaking someone's window and directing it into their house.
Not if that "starting shit" is simply free speech. Arguably there is a reason, we presume bennington is capable of such higher cognition - though there IS reason to doubt it.
I agree, but noise ordinance laws will often take care of that megaphone - leaving you with just the free speech.
Again, vandalism should cover that. Their freedom to unencumbered speech is and should be guaranteed, their right to noise pollute and vandalism - not so much.
I hear you, and it does feel a bit like they "kicked in the door to your hovel" - and certainly hacking conpro (assuming that happened) is an example of that for which they arguably should face punishment. Likewise the repeated harassment of users through clear and wonton abuse of the tag function, and the express/ostensible intent to dox and harass users whose names they collected here ought to equally be swiftly punished.
Still, the right to come here, start shit, and collect usernames (without explicitly announcing plans to use them for illegal purposes) ought to be fine. That's all freedom of speech, and freely available information.
We are equally free to brigade the shit out of them, make endless work for them and their mod teams, express our displeasure in almost any way we please (as long as it is through our shared freedom of speech) and by far the best approach - block, ignore, and report them til the cows come home.
Always starve a troll. They thrive on conflict. (Or give them heaping helpings of kindness; they can't tolerate it.)
This guy marked my username and lots of others. I never marked the username of anyone with threats and anything
I agree that was an abuse of the tag function - but I am not aware of any formalized rules regarding it here.
They didn't determine who made threats etc. That would have required them to read the posts, and risk actually learning something.
Instead they searched for words/phrases. Anyone that said any of their "trigger word" [censorship] list, most likely.
Thanks for the contribution, really appreciate i just received that notification and didn understand at first.. U guys are helping a lot ty
People who reject gatekeeping should be on the outside of the gate
Gatekeeping IS censorship, though I agree that it is important to defend yourself, your home, and the people you love.
Real gates have arguable justified uses, thought-gates/speech-gates never do.