Can you help me understand how I've broken the site guidelines? Both my comment and the parent's are good faith discussions cut along the same rhetoric this site has tolerated for years. None of the responses are even taking this into flamewar territory, it's a black-and-white pastiche of security versus obscurity.
> so we don't have to keep banning you
My account has five karma, Dan. One downside of uncommunicated permanent bans is that it precludes the leverage you ordinarily use to encourage reform.
> One downside of uncommunicated permanent bans is that it precludes the leverage you ordinarily use to encourage reform
I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying here. It seems simple to me though: if you'd stop breaking the site guidelines so repeatedly and badly then we'd be happy not to ban you again, and if you won't stop doing that, we have little choice.
I think it would be very reasonable to redefine the term monopoly (or "anti-competitiveness") so that it encompasses the closed technical platforms that dominate the 21st century.
Sure, but you can't do that legally without an act of congress, and the DOJ only (in theory) prosecutes when laws are broken. Redefining what a monopoly is doesn't really help in a courtroom.
