Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You have to click a spam folder. You have to make a conscious effort to interact with the free speech being sent to you. Therefore it's not free


We have different definitions of censorship. To me that is not censorship.

Censorship is making information functionality unavailable or altering it. Delete it or deliberately make it very hard to access or change it’s contents.

If you click a button or even add a message ( apart from the content ) that is not censorship. That’s why for example I don’t consider it censorship when youtube added covid messages to certain videos.


Sounds like some mental gymnastics to me


No you just loosened the definition of censorship to fit your terrible analogy, then you insulted the GP accusing them of doing mental gymnastics. You're projecting.

But since you do want to stick to the spam filter in your email box analogy I would like to propose a solution.

Would you prefer users be able to manage block lists, filters, and such themselves instead of content being removed for all users?

Do you really prefer this large social media oligopoly to have have final say in what the masses should see? Why not let the users manage what they see?

Do you feel the same way about all subjects? Do you support the right of ISPs blocking porn for example?


[flagged]


First off, I'm not the user you were replying to.

Second, you're not really listening, you're just hurling insults and getting angry, that's not a healthy debate.

You didn't attempt to answer any of my prompts. You didn't even attempt to clarify your definition or understand mine or the GPs.

Sure maybe spam filter lists should be more open? I don't really disagree nor is it really relevant. It's whataboutism.

Yes spam filters could be more user sided, but so could social media moderation. Do you agree or disagree with that?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: