>immediately concerned with the leftist recruiting ring that social media had become, being compromised.
I've already trawled your internet presence enough to know you're an activist. you're revolting.
haha, keep getting weirder, tech industry, nothing can save you from the coming regulation, inquiries, arbitration and/or lawsuits and other forms of attack due in part to people becoming rapidly fatigued by this bs where everything is bad faith and nobody can speak freely anymore without being assumed the worst of.
this kind of shenanigans overall, the climate of this, has been pervasaive for a decade now, and it's gotten ridiculous. everybody defending this is coping, optics-wise anybody who hears about this in passing is going to think it's absurd/insane/stupid and won't look into it further. another own goal.
stuff like this, alongside all the unethical business practices of groups like google, is why the tech industry is gonna be targeted hard by conservatives in the political sphere.
you certainly don't do yourself any favors!
"t-there has to be more to it, there's no way they're this stupid" no, people don't care, surface impression will be: roll eyes "those fucking woke idiots are up to more idiot woke shit again"
dumbarse americans and americanised westerners overall, making a cult/religion out of everything, even "progressives" have become a cult, it's so offputting to anybody outside the sphere who's been alive long enough to know better.
this is all predicated on eye for an eye tier nonsense.
Oh wow, imagine that, a forced meme in tech pushed primarily by marketers, this is totally not a trend at all. /sarcasm
this is like when UX designers mess with a GUI just because they need to make themselves look useful on occasion.
talking about class war? that's not very ESG compliant of David Brooks, lol.
we can't have that now, talking about class iniquity is not supported by investment funds like woke stuff is.
last time we had this kind of political discussion was occupy wall street, a grassroots protest movement that crossed generational, gender and racial divides to see people protest banks, and then as if by "coincidence", the same wall street that was being protested, is suddenly very interested in funding divisive social activism and schools of thought that just stir shit amongst the populace and distract from the 1%ers, suddenly OWS became about protowokies, the sjws, doing all this stupid infighting so they could start building some klout for themselves, constantly trying to outdo each other on virtue signalling and putting their personal pet issues to the fore rather than just taking the likes of goldman sachs and blackrock to task for their manipulative evil behavior.
this is literally the useful idiots strategy right out of the KGB handbook on fucking your enemies up... how people haven't seen this for the last decade and a half or so is beyond me.
I note the police were well funded back then too, interesting that how the cops were very much present in large numbers when it's the banks and wall street that's being protested, kettling and agent provocateurs and all, but when the 2020 "summer of love" came along, can't seem to get enough police... can't control it, just suddenly very useless and incapable, as someone who saw this all play out from the outside, I don't buy it and I no longer trust what the US media says about it all considering I saw buildings burning while news reporters pulled a "everything is fine".
People can scream conspiracy all they want, but one of the core rule of businesses is to do whatever you can to control your opposition or paint them into a corner, so owning your opposition through ESG funding and then dog whistling to them via the media what you want them to stir shit up about for a decade, is far cheaper than what OWS could have become if the woke divisive stuff had not come along when it did.
What did you expect?
People fostered this environment, did you really think it was going to just stop at some arbitrary point?
Now that there's a child abuse coverup involved now we all care about censorship? Give me a break.
The sjw mob created this situation. Reddit is a known hive of ideological extremism.
What i don't get is giving this job to a person i wouldn't hire to wash my car... let alone judge other people's speech and have access to their private DMs and IP addrs. Absolutely questionable behaviour.
If reddit were to become as "regulated" as say facebook (an identical platform from a philosophical perspective) it would be in very deep water right now
welcome to the litigation phase of the culture war!
those who have relied on corrupt social politics and tech industry cronyism to survive so far are likely to not survive what is coming, at the very least they won't be unscathed.
I know that employees within those orgs are present here. turn back now from extremism and the inappropriate intertwining of politics with administrative/moderation duties and you may still survive. Move on. Time to grow up, shit's about to get real.
I don't like to think what's going to happen when people try to bring their political sass to a courtroom and the judge isn't impressed one bit by it.
Zuck was just referred for criminal prosecution too because he can't stop his moderators from saying stupid as fuck stuff on hidden camera about how proud they are of their political bias in their duties. They're clearly coming for the platforms now, they shouldn't have gotten involved with politics.
and then they can argue that a conduit, like an allegedly neutral platform, has no right banning people who didn't break any laws. much like a phone carrier can't drop my calls for saying I like unpopular person X
Patreon isn't winning this one man. Shouldn't have gotten involved in politics. Businesses outside of the web understand this well.
They set the rules in their ToS and then when users tried to utilise their rights under that agreement, patreon changed the terms to try and stop them, that's bullshit, patreon clearly deserved to lose.
If the judge is already willing to point out that patreon changed their terms of service retroactively after being informed by 70 people they intend to go to arbitration, which patreon's terms of service requires, and has now ruled in favor of these 70 individuals in part because of this, you can bet your ass their status as a platform and what it means to be a conduit will be discussed at length in arbitration. Assuming they even get to arbitration because patreon might have to admit they can't afford it if they don't have cash. I doubt things will go well for them from there.
Considering the fact that there's now a standing federal level executive order to enforce platform neutrality in essence, what do you think could happen if the people tasked with this goal notice this little saga, start collecting evidence/info on patreon and then send it off to the FCC for consideration for enforcement...
I remember when gawker thought it'd be a good idea to make flippant remarks about theoretically publishing explicit images and video of child sexual abuse in front of a jury, look at gawker now, they did that to themselves, they could have settled and still actually exist afterwards.
The ones who fall hardest are almost always huge smartasses and showboating right before it happens. Patreon's been proud of their bias for years. It's probably going to bite them in the ass one day soon.
Where is it said that conduits must be neutral? Their TOS enables them to banhammer anyone they deem violates their TOS, presumably. The only motive Owen and his fans have is to bleed Patreon dry of money, no matter how the actual legal case behind it pans out. If that's the only viable attack they can muster, then Patreon would probably file for bankruptcy and set up shop somewhere else, if it really came down to it. Otherwise, we have to focus on the original reason behind the lawsuit, which is focused on the reasons why Owen was banned from Patreon, for violating the TOS rules on hate speech. I'm not aware if Patreon can retroactively amend their own TOS to take away the litigant's ability to extract payment for their legal fees, but that will be decided by a judge.
Still, I would avoid calling Patreon a platform, because it doesn't enable people to post freely as you would a social media platform like Twitter. It's just a payment processor like Paypal, it seems. Even Paypal comes with TOS.
If I am a printer and print jobs that start out OK and then end up porn or right wing racist stuff, and I refuse those jobs, you feel you can sue to force me to do your stuff? Good luck. Patreon ran into a law of unintended consequences, and I sure the right level of court will set this right, of course the arbitrators union and the lawyers union will whine away with your self serving whining.!!!
That would depend on the work. Something like Congratulations to John and Harry on their wedding, would be OK, as it is much like John and Joan.... fully legal.
Some rabid christians might refuse - crush them rightly.
Promoting nazi/racist stuff - all should refuse...
This case is more like If someone came in and asked you to print pornography and you did it for them but refused others because you didn’t like their type of porno.
