# Do people see Free Speech as a old worthless value?



## InsolentGaylord (Mar 10, 2021)

Lately I'm seeing a lot of Kiwi's who give me the impression they see free speech as a old worthless "boomer" value because social media and their peers tell them it's worthless and bad. I've noticed people seem to react badly to announcement of Alt Tech sites that go against the monopoly of Twitter and Facebook, which gives me the impression they don't really care about free speech anymore.

Most left wingers I've met seem to be very low IQ or at least very brainwashed, and they seem to do mental gymnastics in their heads to justify being anti-free speech (or at least anti free speech for opinions that go against theirs). I fail to see why having less freedom in what you can say could even be a popular value outside of radical left wing nutjobs or authoritarian governments, so it seems weird to see people actually not want it, or at least not care about losing it.

So I'm curious who here still cares about Freedom of Speech.


----------



## Arm Pit Cream (Mar 10, 2021)

OP is a pedo


----------



## InsolentGaylord (Mar 10, 2021)

Arm Pit Cream said:


> OP is a pedo



I'm sorry was that meant to imply something?


----------



## Gravityqueen4life (Mar 10, 2021)

are you trying to make me fed post or something?


----------



## DeadFish (Mar 10, 2021)

InsolentGaylord said:


> Lately I'm seeing a lot of Kiwi's who give me the impression they see free speech as a old worthless "boomer" value because social media and their peers tell them it's worthless and bad. I've noticed people seem to react badly to announcement of Alt Tech sites that go against the monopoly of Twitter and Facebook, which gives me the impression they don't really care about free speech anymore.
> 
> Most left wingers I've met seem to be very low IQ or at least very brainwashed, and they seem to do mental gymnastics in their heads to justify being anti-free speech (or at least anti free speech for opinions that go against theirs). I fail to see why having less freedom in what you can say could even be a popular value outside of radical left wing nutjobs or authoritarian governments, so it seems weird to see people actually not want it, or at least not care about losing it.
> 
> So I'm curious who here still cares about Freedom of Speech.


The entire point of free speech is allow the public to speak out against the powerful.

It also allows for any possible radical to vent. Once they vent it often stays just words. Without free speech it leaves malcontents and dissents only one option for change

For these reasons Im all for it.

The problem is most people don't want free speech. They want everyone else to constantly kiss their ass and beat down anyone's else not of their group whenever they please.


----------



## Arm Pit Cream (Mar 10, 2021)

InsolentGaylord said:


> I'm sorry was that meant to imply something?


Thoughts on lolicon?


----------



## InsolentGaylord (Mar 10, 2021)

Arm Pit Cream said:


> Thoughts on lolicon?



Not into it. 

I care more about actual child porn though because that actually harms kids and is evil. Most of the people who make a big stink about Lolicon are hypocritical jerks with skeletons in the closet usually. 

That's my honest opinion, feel free to say it's not good enough because I'm pretty sure you are about to say that.


----------



## Just A Butt (Mar 10, 2021)

how does China's free speech compare to the rest of the world's?


----------



## UrbanZerglings (Mar 10, 2021)

1: People here are generally pro free-speech, sometimes they are satirical about it or make jokes around it though. One of the main signs of autism is an inability to tell sarcasm...

2: "Alt-Tech" is just as (if not even more) censoring when it comes to free speech as mainstream tech, you're actually retarded and brainwashed if you unironically think that they support free speech. Bans and shadowbans are freely given out for questioning their narrative or "being a shill". The hypocrisy of "alt-tech" when it comes to free speech is why its difficult for people to be supportive.

3: "Alt-Tech" like Gab fucks with user privacy and is often less transparent then Facebook (which is really saying something).

4: Boomers hate free speech, remember how they tried to shut down the Vietnam protests?


----------



## Lemmingwise (Mar 10, 2021)

InsolentGaylord said:


> Lately I'm seeing a lot of Kiwi's who give me the impression they see free speech as a old worthless "boomer" value because social media and their peers tell them it's worthless and bad. I've noticed people seem to react badly to announcement of Alt Tech sites that go against the monopoly of Twitter and Facebook, _which gives me the impression they don't really care about free speech anymore._
> 
> Most left wingers I've met seem to be very low IQ or at least very brainwashed, and _they seem to do mental gymnastics in their heads to justify being anti-free speech_ (or at least anti free speech for opinions that go against theirs). _I fail to see why having less freedom in what you can say could even be a popular_ value outside of radical left wing nutjobs or authoritarian governments, so it seems weird to see people actually not want it, or at least not care about losing it.
> 
> So I'm curious who here still cares about Freedom of Speech.


I think people are mostly jaded about it. It's not that people don't care about free speech, but having seen that arena for free speech grow smaller and smaller until the free speech zone is practically behind the arby's from 3:00 to 4:00, it's hard to take serious.

After seeing the woman who exposed the panama papers die in a car explosion, seeing Assange basicly imprisoned first in the embassy and later even taken from there, for the crime of doing journalism and giving people some insight in what is going on behind the scenes.

Meanwhile the reason you get the impression is because everybody that was vocal defending of free speech has been silenced in one way or another, either outright censored, self-censored because they saw what happened to others, soft-censored with the velvet hand of tech censorship (just lower engagement, slowly unsubscribe people, stop allowing certain people from showing up in recommended).

And then finally the censorship of a president.

So yeah, I think people care about it, but mostly people are afraid to be as based as some people, like the one that runs this site that they call Noël or something like that.


----------



## Getwhatyou (Mar 10, 2021)

I agree with the idea of free speech. However I see more people crying about the backlash saying things others don't like.

Wanna support pedos. Fine but don't cry when people destroy your life because they don't like pedos.


----------



## Ted_Breakfast (Mar 10, 2021)

UrbanZerglings said:


> 1: People here are generally pro free-speech, sometimes they are satirical about it or make jokes around it though. One of the main signs of autism is an inability to tell sarcasm...
> 
> 2: "Alt-Tech" is just as (if not even more) censoring when it comes to free speech as mainstream tech, you're actually retarded and brainwashed if you unironically think that they support free speech. Bans and shadowbans are freely given out for questioning their narrative or "being a shill". The hypocrisy of "alt-tech" when it comes to free speech is why its difficult for people to be supportive.
> 
> ...


Weren't Boomers the ones doing most of the protesting?


----------



## Banditotron (Mar 10, 2021)

I understand freedom as expression as an inalienable right above all others.


----------



## UrbanZerglings (Mar 10, 2021)

Ted_Breakfast said:


> Weren't Boomers the ones doing most of the protesting?


I'm retarded lmao. Ya, the boomers at the time of the boomers tried to shut down vietnam protests.


----------



## DeadFish (Mar 10, 2021)

Arm Pit Cream said:


> Thoughts on lolicon?


It matters not if I find it distasteful or not (I do).
It matters if said thing helps one gain power.
Right now biden is known for being inappropriate with children. The left is known being permissive with sickos and loons.

The right isn't

Who has the most power now?

The ones who were permissive with the sickos

Those who seen anything that eroticized children as taboo are the ones getting the ban hammer.


----------



## Queen Elizabeth II (Mar 10, 2021)

DeadFish said:


> Those who seen anything that eroticized children as taboo are the ones getting the ban hammer.



Fucking wot

Twitter is not the real world. If anyone talked about lolicon or MAPS in public just about anywhere in the western world they'd be murdered in the street.

Unless they're brown. Then we admire and compliment their beautiful ethnic culture.


----------



## DeadFish (Mar 10, 2021)

Fagatron said:


> Fucking wot
> 
> Twitter is not the real world. If anyone talked about lolicon or MAPS in public just about anywhere in the western world they'd be murdered in the street.
> 
> Unless they're brown. Then we admire and compliment their beautiful ethnic culture.


Whose president now? Alot of progressives turn out to be pedos
It's not a question of right or wrong but what helps one gain power and ensure survival


----------



## Queen Elizabeth II (Mar 10, 2021)

DeadFish said:


> Whose president now? Alot of progressives turn out to be pedos
> It's not a question of right or wrong but what helps one gain power and ensure survival


Plenty of pedos in the Churches and Mosques too, and I think we would struggle to label most of them as progressive.


----------



## KimCoppolaAficionado (Mar 10, 2021)

@DeadFish have you shown your rack yet like you said you would?


----------



## I Love Beef (Mar 10, 2021)

With great power comes great responsibility.

If you live in a free country and can't get what you want, you both suck it up.... and look for greener pastures. That's life. You learn from that shit and realize you're not right all the time. In a free country, ironically there is the want to establish one's own domain, but it's not wrong as long as it's not trying to make it ingrained by force and shows in time that its actions talk, bullshit walks.

In the end, where's the spirit of laissez-faire these days? If there's anything to follow, it's what's for the good of all men, and we sometimes need to be reminded that we don't usually know what's right all the time. Perhaps it's not entirely "the tree of liberty must be occassionally watered with the blood of tyrants", but more along the lines of live and let die.

So I agree in that you can say and express what you want. but you'd best see the signs of where you're headed and if anyone agrees with you. And if there's gonna be a fight, you best know how to make war as much as peace and if it's going to be worth dying for. Live free or die.


----------



## MuuMuu Bunnylips (Mar 10, 2021)

You only have "the right to free speech" if you're saying something everybody else wants to hear.

If you believe otherwise, you're living in a cave.


----------



## WhoBusTank69 (Mar 10, 2021)

There are arguments against free speech because people have not experienced the absence of such. Because their perspective on speech is narrow, that they think only their version of "bad" is real. Maybe they equate the limpwristed punishments from school to real life consequences, where they'll get a stern talking-to for slipping(which they wont, as they know what is truly "bad") and go on their way.
Phones already listen to us constantly when not turned off, any errant joke you make on Twitter can quickly begin trending, and just about every website requests personally identifiable information in the guise of personal security. If it's decided free speech is outdated and old fashioned because people are mad on the internet, we're pretty well fucked.


----------



## Jonah Hill poster (Mar 10, 2021)

Free speech is supposed to be free for a reason. The minute you hear the word “censorship”, just ask which do you want to believe: 

thinking because the media/journalist/politician/entertainer told you so
*OR*​thinking for yourself?


----------



## NOT Sword Fighter Super (Mar 10, 2021)

*murder, death, kill*


----------



## Calandrino (Mar 10, 2021)

WhoBusTank69 said:


> If it's decided free speech is outdated and old fashioned because people are mad on the internet, we're pretty well fucked.


The currently prevailing narrative is that the ability of people to say whatever they want or spread any kind of opinion indiscriminately is possibly the single biggest threat to civilization right now. The only reason why you don't hear "free speech" being attacked as such is because it has very good branding, what with it being in the US Constitution and all. So the opposition is stated in the form: "I'm the biggest supporter of free speech you'll ever see, but [CENSORSHIP = GOOD]". Cutting through the weaseling, I really think the majority of Americans, especially younger ones, think that freedom of speech is simply a bad thing, even if they won't say that in as many words. And probably almost every other country is worse.


----------



## Furret (Mar 10, 2021)

I would say I support free speech. There are a lot of ideas on the Internet that I don't like, but that doesn't mean they should be censored. I am not, however, obligated to take those ideas seriously or platform them, which is an important detail that a lot of people shouting about free speech tend to forget, at least in America.


----------



## Just A Butt (Mar 10, 2021)

a short list of ways your speech is already limited:

you can't threaten someone
you can't defame someone
you can't scream "fire!" in a theater, or "bomb!" on an airplane
i don't know, there's lots of other ones. everyone crying about how things aren't as free as they've been before... boohoohoo. get over it


----------



## DeadFish (Mar 10, 2021)

DeadFish said:


> Whose president now? Alot of progressives turn out to be pedos
> It's not a question of right or wrong but what helps one gain power and ensure survival


Pedos progressives or not often seek power so they can indulge in their vice


----------



## Taylor Swift's Ghostwrite (Mar 10, 2021)

I'm big on negative/positive right theory. There are rights you can't really be "given" because its not like the government has a box of free speech they distribute to everyone. The phrase "freedom of speech" is kind of misleading, because what it ultimately is freedom from consequences of that speech, then we draw the line at what level you can go to without facing consequence.

In say the US, the limit has always been around speech that causes harm to others because it impacts the rights of others. In a place like Iran your speech will illicit consequence at a much less extreme place. The issue lately has become how define "harm" in more liberal/free places, and the question of at what point does speech become inciting. The limits on it are getting stricter because of the conflicts between social groups escalating.

EDIT: When I said consequence in the first paragraph, I meant legal not other people telling you to STFU.


----------



## NerdShamer (Mar 10, 2021)

Just A Butt said:


> a short list of ways your speech is already limited:
> 
> you can't threaten someone
> you can't defame someone
> ...


UK has those anti-harassment laws aimed at stopping misgendering and political satire.


----------



## FunPosting101 (Mar 10, 2021)

DeadFish said:


> Whose president now? Alot of progressives turn out to be pedos
> It's not a question of right or wrong but what helps one gain power and ensure survival


Biden's peculiar activities with little kids had to be covered up and drowned out by the media. If the MSM weren't running interference for him, all the electoral fraud in the world wouldn't have been enough to get Biden across the finish line.


----------



## mr.moon1488 (Mar 10, 2021)

Imo it's an unobtainable ideal.  Speech is ultimately a weapon in many ways.  If you have one culture that says "everyone should have free speech," and another culture that says "only we should have free speech," which culture will eventually prevail if those two cultures clash?  The one who disarmed their opponent at every available opportunity, or the one who never capitalized on their political victories?


----------



## HarveyMC (Mar 10, 2021)

Yo paraphrase Null.

“Nobody likes free speech. Free speech means that you can wake up in the morning to someone cancelling you on Twitter, or someone advocating for the genocide of your people, or completely false statements being spread about you and your loved ones. However, for as bad as free speech CAN be, anything but free speech is infinitely worse. Because once you decide who gets to decide what is and isn’t free speech, then you take the down sides of free speech with added affect that they are legitimized as “the truth” by the powers that be”


----------



## DeadFish (Mar 10, 2021)

FunPosting101 said:


> Biden's peculiar activities with little kids had to be covered up and drowned out by the media. If the MSM weren't running interference for him, all the electoral fraud in the world wouldn't have been enough to get Biden across the finish line.



It doesn't challenge my statement. Those who are permissive will win power more often then those who seek to restrict certain character traits.

IS that a good thing? No it's not but that's how it is


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 10, 2021)

The first amendment is that the government cannot restrict your speech. Private companies can do so as they wish.

If you had a job (big if considering you're a right-winger on Kiwi Farms), you'd be able to be fired for saying something offensive at work. Same concept applies.


----------



## Syaoran Li (Mar 10, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> The first amendment is that the government cannot restrict your speech. Private companies can do so as they wish.
> 
> If you had a job (big if considering you're a right-winger on Kiwi Farms), you'd be able to be fired for saying something offensive at work. Same concept applies.



Unfortunately, private corporations practically are the de facto government in this country. Both of the major political parties and damn near all the politicians at the national level are owned by the same handful of mega-corporations.

And sadly, these corporate elites all push for a specific monoculture and will use corporate censorship to crush any dissenting views and tar them with the same broad brush.

The Woke Left is sitting pretty now but they'll get the same kind of treatment if they become too much of a liability for the corporatist rule class.

And yes, a lot of this is the fault of the conservatives who gleefully de-regulated a lot under Reagan and his merry band of neocons and then Bush Sr., Clinton, Dubya, and Obama all gleefully did their part to further entrench corporatism and champion it further.

Trump talked a big game of fighting the corporatists but he foolishly signed off on that tax break (PROTIP: If the establishment neocons of the GOP is so gung-ho on backing it, it's probably bad) and what few things he did do were way too little and way too late, which cost him the election in the end.


----------



## Samson Pumpkin Jr. (Mar 17, 2021)

Free speech is worthless. what does it even give you?


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 17, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> The first amendment is that the government cannot restrict your speech. Private companies can do so as they wish.
> 
> If you had a job (big if considering you're a right-winger on Kiwi Farms), you'd be able to be fired for saying something offensive at work. Same concept applies.


Yeah, it's like how companies used to be able to pollute the environment as much as they wanted, and now they are still allowed to pollute the environment as much as they want. If something is written into the law that's how things work after all, and therefore we could never criticize global corporations for the immense harm they cause by manipulating and suppressing the free spread of information.

Oh btw, nice prejudice you got there. 10/10 insult really. Idiot.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 17, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Yeah, it's like how companies used to be able to pollute the environment as much as they wanted, and now they are still allowed to pollute the environment as much as they want. If something is written into the law that's how things work after all, and therefore we could never criticize global corporations for the immense harm they cause by manipulating and suppressing the free spread of information.


What? The first amendment is that the government cannot punish you for your speech. Your employer sure as hell can, as can private companies. If you called a coworker the gamer word, you'd be fired. Same idea applies. It's not a tough concept.



WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Oh btw, nice prejudice you got there. 10/10 insult really. Idiot.


lol calm down jabroni


----------



## KimCoppolaAficionado (Mar 17, 2021)

Austrian Conscript 1915 said:


> Free speech is worthless. what does it even give you?


The right to autistically obsess over an idealized form of monarchical society without being exiled to a Siberian labor camp.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Youtube is obviously free to enforce their terms of services. Only an idiot would think that an argument to enforce, change or alter laws means that a company would not be able to enforce their own terms of services. If increased protection for free speech would run contrary to youtubes terms of service obviously they'd either have to change those terms (and be fully allowed to enforce whatever new tos they had) or they'd have to take on greater accountability for whatever current tos they have in order to met the increased standards. Terms of service are not some unchangeable laws of nature you absolute nitwit, they are changed constantly.


Funny, you are saying that Youtube enforcing their TOS should not be allowed (because it restricts speech on their platform) but now you're saying it should be. You can't have it both ways.



WhatIsThePunchline said:


> As for a blue anon, it refers to people who whines about "conspiracy theories" while mindlessly believing whatever conspiracy theories are fed to them.


And what conspiracy do I believe? I've only seen you and one other right-wing retard on here talk about "blue anon", so I am guessing this is the new meme on /pol/


----------



## A Welsh Cake (Mar 18, 2021)

Speech should be taxed.


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Funny, you are saying that Youtube enforcing their TOS should not be allowed (because it restricts speech on their platform) but now you're saying it should be. You can't have it both ways.
> 
> 
> And what conspiracy do I believe? I've only seen you and one other right-wing retard on here talk about "blue anon", so I am guessing this is the new meme on /pol/


Already explained it. Literally in the post you quoted. If you're to dumb to understand it that's on you. 

And I don't know what conspiracy theories you believe. What conspiracy theories do I believe? Of course you don't know. But I understand why it's important to you to try to enforce a standard you don't live up to yourself.

 The whole "it's okay when private companies make me blind and dumb because the law says so" is moronic on so many levels.

It doesn't matter who harms you, you are still harmed. Laws and regulations are updated over time as we notice harm is still done and that they are needed. 

And no, it's not just the people being persecuted that gets harmed by this. You are harmed by this to, because now you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about. Is the person who just got banned an actual nutter or is he highlighting a critical flaw in some proposed policy by a politician? You have no clue and you don't care. When you get fucked by that policy you won't know about it. Congrats on living in ignorance. But it's ok, what's fucking you over isn't the state, it's a corporation helping the state to fuck you over. Moron.

If this shit isn't covered by existing laws, that's an argument that means nothing except that something must be done so that it is.

But you guying "muh private companies" just label you as a moron. 

As for youtube(since you seem to like that site), how about outlawing the practice of shadowbans. When you make a post on youtube, and they hide that post, they should have to inform you they've hidden the post. Shadowbans should be illegal.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Already explained it. Literally in the post you quoted. If you're to dumb to understand it that's on you.
> 
> And I don't know what conspiracy theories you believe. What conspiracy theories do I believe? Of course you don't know. But I understand why it's important to you to try to enforce a standard you don't live up to yourself.
> 
> The whole "it's okay when private companies make me blind and dumb because the law says so" is moronic on so many levels.


Just because you can't violate Youtube's TOS doesn't mean they're making you dumb and blind. Sorry that QAnon conspiracy theories and baseless election fraud claims get you banned from there. After Jan 6th, it's not shocking that they'd ban that shit.



WhatIsThePunchline said:


> It doesn't matter who harms you, you are still harmed. Laws and regulations are updated over time as we notice harm is still done and that they are needed.
> 
> And no, it's not just the people being persecuted that gets harmed by this. You are harmed by this to, because now you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about. Is the person who just got banned an actual nutter or is he highlighting a critical flaw in some proposed policy by a politician? You have no clue and you don't care. When you get fucked by that policy you won't know about it. Congrats on living in ignorance. But it's ok, what's fucking you over isn't the state, it's a corporation helping the state to fuck you over. Moron.


It doesn't matter. You violate their TOS, you get banned. It applies to more than just Youtube. If you break your job's rules, you'll be fired, too. You can't have it both ways, and I re-read your post and you still don't explain it.  You just want your fellow retards to be able to say whatever they want and not allow private companies to police their platforms. Boo hoo.


WhatIsThePunchline said:


> If this shit isn't covered by existing laws, that's an argument that means nothing except that something must be done so that it is.
> 
> But you guying "muh private companies" just label you as a moron.
> 
> As for youtube(since you seem to like that site), how about outlawing the practice of shadowbans. When you make a post on youtube, and they hide that post, they should have to inform you they've hidden the post. Shadowbans should be illegal.


I am sorry your QAnon channel got you banned from Youtube, but I am still waiting to know what baseless conspiracy theories I believe in.


----------



## CreamyHerman’s (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Just because you can't violate Youtube's TOS doesn't mean they're making you dumb and blind. Sorry that QAnon conspiracy theories and baseless election fraud claims get you banned from there. After Jan 6th, it's not shocking that they'd ban that shit


If that’s the case, Why didn’t they ban ‘Russia gate’ after how baseless that was? Or didn’t ban Bernie Sanders theories about him losing 2016 to HRC after one of his fanboys shot up a baseball field? Using your logic, the Washington post admitted recently that they lied about what Trump said during the election, so how come their channel hasn’t been nuked from orbit?


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

CreamyHerman’s said:


> If that’s the case, Why didn’t they ban ‘Russia gate’ after how baseless that was? Or didn’t ban Bernie Sanders theories about him losing 2016 to HRC after one of his fanboys shot up a baseball field?


That was before that was on their terms of service. After Jan 6th and Trump refusing to believe he lost the election caused a bunch of his retard cult to try and overturn democracy, they realized they needed to change things.



CreamyHerman’s said:


> Using your logic, the Washington post admitted recently that they lied about what Trump said during the election, so how come their channel hasn’t been nuked from orbit?


Citation needed


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Just because you can't violate Youtube's TOS doesn't mean they're making you dumb and blind. Sorry that QAnon conspiracy theories and baseless election fraud claims get you banned from there. After Jan 6th, it's not shocking that they'd ban that shit.
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter. You violate their TOS, you get banned. It applies to more than just Youtube. If you break your job's rules, you'll be fired, too. You can't have it both ways, and I re-read your post and you still don't explain it.  You just want your fellow retards to be able to say whatever they want and not allow private companies to police their platforms. Boo hoo.
> ...


Never said that violating youtubes TOS makes you dumb and blind. Never mentioned QAnon either.

I said: "If increased protection for free speech would run contrary to youtubes terms of service obviously they'd either have to change those terms (and be fully allowed to enforce whatever new tos they had) or they'd have to take on greater accountability for whatever current tos they have in order to met the increased standards. Terms of service are not some unchangeable laws of nature you absolute nitwit, they are changed constantly."

What's so difficult to understand about that?

And social media (including youtube) manipulating what information you can receive makes you dumb and blind yes. You're the one obsessing about that having something to do with their TOS and random QAnon people, not me.

And I don't know what conspiracy theories you believe in. Which ones do I believe in? Do inform me.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Never said that violating youtubes TOS makes you dumb and blind. Never mentioned QAnon either.
> 
> I said: "If increased protection for free speech would run contrary to youtubes terms of service obviously they'd either have to change those terms (and be fully allowed to enforce whatever new tos they had) or they'd have to take on greater accountability for whatever current tos they have in order to met the increased standards. Terms of service are not some unchangeable laws of nature you absolute nitwit, they are changed constantly."


Right, but you think that companies shouldn't be able to ban anyone for saying anyone. That means if someone goes into your store, you can't ban them for dropping the gamer word. Or for saying shit to employees. What you want is completely retarded.



WhatIsThePunchline said:


> And social media (including youtube) manipulating what information you can receive makes you dumb and blind yes. You're the one obsessing about that having something to do with their TOS and random QAnon people, not me.


They're not manipulating it, they just aren't allowing you to share certain things. Same reason why you can't go on FB and share porn or drop the gamerword. They realize that if you allow anyone to say anything, it makes people use it less, which affects their revenue.



WhatIsThePunchline said:


> And I don't know what conspiracy theories you believe in. Which ones do I believe in? Do inform me.


You are the one who said I believed in them when you accused me of being "blue anon". So please, tell me which conspiracy theories I believe in.

Your attempts to gaslight me are hilariously inept, though.


----------



## CreamyHerman’s (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> That was before that was on their terms of service


They have a clause to retroactively delete channels and videos and have done it before, especially to send a message. I take it you aren’t aware of what H3 pulls behind the scenes with a video that was critical about him?


Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Citation needed





			https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-call-georgia-investigator/2021/01/09/7a55c7fa-51cf-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html
		


In case you can’t read the article:
_Correction: Two months after publication of this story, the Georgia secretary of state released an audio recording of President Donald Trump’s December phone call with the state’s top elections investigator. The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source. Trump did not tell the investigator to “find the fraud” or say she would be “a national hero” if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find “dishonesty” there. He also told her that she had “the most important job in the country right now.” A story about the recording can be found here. The headline and text of this story have been corrected to remove quotes misattributed to Trump._


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

CreamyHerman’s said:


> They have a clause to retroactively delete channels and videos and have done it before, especially to send a message. I take it you aren’t aware of what H3 pulls behind the scenes with a video that was critical about him?


Sorry you're upset that Youtube enforces their terms of service.



CreamyHerman’s said:


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-call-georgia-investigator/2021/01/09/7a55c7fa-51cf-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They made a mistake and admitted it? OH MY GOD! I know it's hard for you right-wingers to accept, but some people admit when they made a mistake instead of doubling down. Lying is not the same as making a mistake.


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Right, but you think that companies shouldn't be able to ban anyone for saying anyone. That means if someone goes into your store, you can't ban them for dropping the gamer word. Or for saying shit to employees. What you want is completely retarded.
> 
> 
> They're not manipulating it, they just aren't allowing you to share certain things. Same reason why you can't go on FB and share porn or drop the gamerword. They realize that if you allow anyone to say anything, it makes people use it less, which affects their revenue.
> ...


Never said companies shouldn't be able to ban anyone for saying anything either.

You can have a permissive degree of free speech without going full classic 4chan or whatever.

In fact if you recall when I mentioned that youtube should not be able to shadowban you, I didn't say they shouldn't be allowed to remove your comment. I said they shouldn't remove it without telling you about it. Same goes for a channel.

Other stuff youtube should be legally required to do: If they ban your channel or ban you from using the platform they should have to tell you why.
Stuff that would be nice but maybe not required: If you've had a channel up for  a certain amount of time and it's monetized and youtube wants to ban it, there should be a grace period so you have time to for example inform your fans and tell them they can go somewhere else, or at least download any videos you haven't backed up (though people should back up their videos).

And if you are not allowed to speak, I am not allowed to hear you. As a result we both hear and see less. It becomes easier to lie to us, we both become blind and stupid.

And I've already told you, I don't know what conspiracy theories you believe. But if you're this for walking trough life with a blindfold undoubtedly you have some nonsense you take for granted.

And "You're gaslighting me" is the excuse of the inept. Also ironic considering you're arguing big corpos should be allowed to gaslight you without issue cause 'they're not the government'.


----------



## CreamyHerman’s (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Sorry you're upset that Youtube enforces their terms of service


They don’t though, they’re very deliberate on who they punish and who they don’t. Do you know  that YouTube in their TOS for no nudity for sexual gratification, yet there is a channel called nude yoga that is clearly sexual in nature but has yet to be removed? You clearly never watch anyone criticize the TOS on YouTube have you?


Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> They made a mistake and admitted it? OH MY GOD! I know it's hard for you right-wingers to accept, but some people admit when they made a mistake instead of doubling down. Lying is not the same as making a mistake


So instead of correcting their mistake immediately, they waited two months? Let’s use your logic: what if you have wife and she cheated on you, lied about it for two months, then said ‘Honey I have a correction to make two months ago: I did cheat on you’


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

CreamyHerman’s said:


> They don’t though, they’re very deliberate on who they punish and who they don’t. Do you know  that YouTube in their TOS for no nudity for sexual gratification, yet there is a channel called nude yoga that is clearly sexual in nature but has yet to be removed? You clearly never watch anyone criticize the TOS on YouTube have you?


They also allow medical examination videos because it's not in a sexual nature. They've determined they don't violate their TOS. Sorry that you're upset that a private company is being run as they see fit and that the government doesn't control everything. Why do you want communism?


CreamyHerman’s said:


> So instead of correcting their mistake immediately, they waited two months? Let’s use your logic: what if you have wife and she cheated on you, lied about it for two months, then said ‘Honey I have a correction to make two months ago: I did cheat on you’


Maybe they didn't know until then? That would be a deliberate lie and not a mistake. Mistakes happen. If your cult leader had admitted to some mistakes, maybe he'd have won and your fellow cultists wouldn't have tried to overthrow democracy on Jan 6th, which lead to these changes?


----------



## CreamyHerman’s (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> They also allow medical examination videos because it's not in a sexual nature


So yoga isn’t sexual in nature? The twitch thots who do yoga poses in skin tight pants clearly are just practicing it for their health then and not at all to gain simps.


Spoiler: NSFW










Tell me, what’s medical about this?


Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Maybe they didn't know until then


They had the source, how the fuck does a multi-million dollar journalistic firm not know how to track sources? I have books written over a hundred years ago that have better first hand sources in my library than the entire staff at the Post if that’s the case.

Also where were the protestors that were supposed to show up in March? The ones the media and government were so afraid that they still have the NG there?


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

CreamyHerman’s said:


> So yoga isn’t sexual in nature? The twitch thots who do yoga poses in skin tight pants clearly are just practicing it for their health then and not at all to gain simps.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: NSFW
> ...


Youtube has found it doesn't violate their TOS. I don't know what else to tell you. Sorry that you are assblasted about that, but I don't know what to tell you. You want the government to restrict what companies can do, while I do not. I am not a commie.



CreamyHerman’s said:


> They had the source, how the fuck does a multi-million dollar journalistic firm not know how to track sources? I have books written over a hundred years ago that have better first hand sources in my library than the entire staff at the Post if that’s the case.


Maybe they didn't notice it? 



CreamyHerman’s said:


> Also where were the protestors that were supposed to show up in March? The ones the media and government were so afraid that they still have the NG there?


How the fuck should I know? I am sure having the NG there ready to crack their QSkulls helped deter them.

It's amazing how you "small government" folks are totally fine with the government telling private companies how to run themselves. I am starting to think you're just upset that they're enforcing their TOS against your fellow Qtards and conspiracy nutjobs


----------



## Uncle Warren (Mar 18, 2021)

If anyone believes that Youtube are currently, or should ever be, consistent with their TOS they're deluding themselves.

That said I'd rather pick youtube over Twitch. At least you have to work pretty fucking hard to get banned, while Twitch will ban you for not having tits.


----------



## CreamyHerman’s (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Youtube has found it doesn't violate their TOS. I don't know what else to tell you. Sorry that you are assblasted about that, but I don't know what to tell you. You want the government to restrict what companies can do, while I do not. I am not a commie


It literally violates their own TOS, as it has nothing to do with health and it’s just a girl doing yoga naked with no explanation whatsoever. Stop being a dicksucker for a corporation. You know you can criticize these corporations and not be a commie right? Jesus Christ.


Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> How the fuck should I know? I am sure having the NG there ready to crack their QSkulls helped deter them.


Yet it doesn’t stop Antifa from destroying Portland, maybe the “Qretards” are more respectful than the Antifa nerds?


Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> It's amazing how you "small government" folks are totally fine with the government telling private companies how to run themselves. I am starting to think you're just upset that they're enforcing their TOS against your fellow Qtards and conspiracy nutjobs


Yeah, large neoliberal corporations that suck the teet of china and deliberately work with banking systems to censor and unperson someone if they have a different opinion. On top of that they don’t even want to hire Americans! I have been a contractor since 2018, have over 5 years of experience in my field of work, yet I had a HR rep told me that I am too expensive to hire and they’re opting for H1B! My god man, are you really this pathetic?? ‘Won’t someone please think of these billion dollar corporations??’


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

CreamyHerman’s said:


> It literally violates their own TOS, as it has nothing to do with health and it’s just a girl doing yoga naked with no explanation whatsoever. Stop being a dicksucker for a corporation. You know you can criticize these corporations and not be a commie right? Jesus Christ.


Youtube feels it doesn't violate their TOS, and it's their company. Why are you a communist?



CreamyHerman’s said:


> Yet it doesn’t stop Antifa from destroying Portland, maybe the “Qretards” are more respectful than the Antifa nerds?


Maybe Antifa are just braver than your fellow Qtards



CreamyHerman’s said:


> Yeah, large neoliberal corporations that suck the teet of china and deliberately work with banking systems to censor and unperson someone if they have a different opinion. On top of that they don’t even want to hire Americans! I have been a contractor since 2018, have over 5 years of experience in my field of work, yet I had a HR rep told me that I am too expensive to hire and they’re opting for H1B! My god man, are you really this pathetic?? ‘Won’t someone please think of these billion dollar corporations??’


You just want the government controlling everything, I see. We will have to differ because I am not a commie like you


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Youtube feels it doesn't violate their TOS, and it's their company. Why are you a communist?
> 
> 
> Maybe Antifa are just braver than your fellow Qtards
> ...


Also, when reddit bans a sub and posts a "this sub was banned for hate" they should be legally required to allow the admins or moderators of the sub to post a rebuttal. No more of this "WE ARE TOTES BANNING YOU FOR THIS REASON LALALALA" bullshit.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Also, when reddit bans a sub and posts a "this sub was banned for hate" they should be legally required to allow the admins or moderators of the sub to post a rebuttal. No more of this "WE ARE TOTES BANNING YOU FOR THIS REASON LALALALA" bullshit.


I think we found out why you're so assblasted. What subreddit did you get banned from?


----------



## CreamyHerman’s (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Why are you a communist


If  I am a commie then you are a fascist


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

CreamyHerman’s said:


> If  I am a commie then you are a fascist


You're pushing for the government to control all corporations, so it fits


----------



## CreamyHerman’s (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> You're pushing for the government to control all corporations, so it fits


And you would like to have a corporation censor people on a whim, just like a proper Fascist


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> I think we found out why you're so assblasted. What subreddit did you get banned from?


Lol, you acussing anyone else of being assblasted. 

And again, who's talking about being banned from a subreddit? I was talking about subreddits being banned. Try to keep up. Read the text slowly and think about it.


----------



## likeacrackado (Mar 18, 2021)

No they don't because 'free speech' like other supposed human rights do not exist.


----------



## Shovel Mech Pilot (Mar 18, 2021)

Free speech is a historical outlier. Was there even anything like the first amendment prior to the USA? If the liberals get what they want and finish their evisceration of 1A, there won't be anything like it afterwards.


----------



## Jimjamflimflam (Mar 18, 2021)

People who have never had a contrary thought or original idea in their life have no problem with silencing speech because they can't convince every being the silenced one.

Sadly with how much group thought and hive mentality is required to not be expelled by society there is a sizable portion of the population that fall into this category.


----------



## Unyielding Stupidity (Mar 18, 2021)

People in general don't care about free speech, to them it's just a mindless buzzword. I guarantee you the vast majority of people would surrender their freedom of speech so that the government could protect them from mean words on the internet., because the talking heads on the media told them that only fascists care about freedom of speech.


----------



## Jimjamflimflam (Mar 18, 2021)

Unyielding Stupidity said:


> People in general don't care about free speech, to them it's just a mindless buzzword. I guarantee you the vast majority of people would surrender their freedom of speech so that the government could protect them from mean words on the internet., because the talking heads on the media told them that only fascists care about freedom of speech.



Take away their porn and goddamn will they suddenly throw a fit over free speech being infringed on.


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Unyielding Stupidity said:


> People in general don't care about free speech, to them it's just a mindless buzzword. I guarantee you the vast majority of people would surrender their freedom of speech so that the government could protect them from mean words on the internet., because the talking heads on the media told them that only fascists care about freedom of speech.


Sadly true. Also I think Null has the right of it. Unless you regulate the banks it doesn't really matter what you do with social media or news outlets or whatever.


----------



## All Cops Are Based (Mar 18, 2021)

It's treated as outdated because tacitly speaking we already have censorship in America. It's just economic censorship. There are certain ideas you cannot express or you'll be fired from your job, kicked from paypal, possibly your bank and other important financial infrastructure.

The legal term "freedom of speech" (freedom to say what you want without fear of government censoring you) is an old definition that hasn't caught up to our present day reality of the power of state & the corporate world bleeding into each other, so every discussion about it devolves into midwits like HHH getting their dildo shaped bat signal to swoop and and screech MUH PRIVATE COMPANIES. Ironically these are the same people who wipe their ass with the constitution in second amendment arguments because "hurr, the founding fathers didn't know how advanced guns would get."

Then it devolves into some spergfest over whether or not twitter and paypal deplatforming dissent is exactly like poor downtrodden ma & pa businesses practicing their freedom of association. It's just stupid and dishonest and nobody likes having this argument over and over.


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Yeah, the finances are definitely part of it. If I want to pay you money, and you aren't selling something illegal, the banks and payment processors should process the transaction and otherwise keep out of it. They shouldn't be able to get in the way and go 'ackshually we control your wallet'.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Lol, you acussing anyone else of being assblasted.
> 
> And again, who's talking about being banned from a subreddit? I was talking about subreddits being banned. Try to keep up. Read the text slowly and think about it.


Okay, then I guess you're assblasted because your QAnon subreddits were deleted. Bawww harder


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Okay, then I guess you're assblasted because your QAnon subreddits were deleted. Bawww harder


Just as a reminder I did call you a moron at the start of this. And now you are reduced to this. So yeah I'm laughing.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Just as a reminder I did call you a moron at the start of this. And now you are reduced to this. So yeah I'm laughing.


I can't imagine being this mad at Reddit over anything


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> I can't imagine being this mad at Reddit over anything


No no no, you don't get it. 

I called you a moron.

And then a couple of posts later you were ranting about how regulation means communism.

That's amazing.


----------



## I-chi (Mar 18, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> No no no, you don't get it.
> 
> I called you a moron.
> 
> ...



Why are you arguing with the contrarian flip-flopper whose bad faith arguments are predicated on sperging out over KF's status as a right-wing site by the definition of the people who want to scour it from the internet? That - rather than accept that $20 isn't getting him or the rest of his retard ilk any more special treatment and that enlightened centrism is gay and cowardly - it's a more worthwhile use of his time to pretend he's owning the Qtards living under his bed.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

I-chi said:


> Why are you arguing with the contrarian flip-flopper whose bad faith arguments are predicated on sperging out over KF's status as a right-wing site by the definition of the people who want to scour it from the internet? That - rather than accept that $20 isn't getting him or the rest of his retard ilk any more special treatment and that enlightened centrism is gay and cowardly - it's a more worthwhile use of his time to pretend he's owning the Qtards living under his bed.


Lol you're still seething mad that I made fun of Qtards like you. Still Trusting The Plan?



WhatIsThePunchline said:


> No no no, you don't get it.
> 
> I called you a moron.
> 
> ...


It's more amazing that you still don't get it. You think the government shouldn't let companies run themselves as they see fit. So much for small government. You're just assblasted that you got banned from Reddit


----------



## I-chi (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Lol you're still seething mad that I made fun of Qtards like you. Still Trusting The Plan?
> 
> 
> It's more amazing that you still don't get it. You think the government shouldn't let companies run themselves as they see fit. So much for small government. You're just assblasted that you got banned from Reddit



Have you checked under your bed yet tonight, Terry? They could be anywhere.


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 18, 2021)

I-chi said:


> Have you checked under your bed yet tonight, Terry? They could be anywhere.


Lol calm down. It's not healthy to be mad for 5 months


----------



## Yinci (Mar 18, 2021)

I like a little nationalization in my economy.. Even if Airplane tickets are $600. I don;t need to travel, everyone is a racist or some shit.


----------



## I-chi (Mar 18, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Lol calm down. It's not healthy to be mad for 5 months



No seriously just check, it would be a great loss to this site if they somehow got you. Being a steamy little leprechaun, I understand it may be very difficult to touch your toes to the floor, but you gotta make the effort every once in awhile.


----------



## Vulva Gape (Mar 18, 2021)

Most of the people crying about muh free speech are the autistic nazis I wouldn't mind being silenced anyway, so yeah I guess I kind of see it that way.


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 19, 2021)

I-chi said:


> Why are you arguing with the contrarian flip-flopper whose bad faith arguments are predicated on sperging out over KF's status as a right-wing site by the definition of the people who want to scour it from the internet? That - rather than accept that $20 isn't getting him or the rest of his retard ilk any more special treatment and that enlightened centrism is gay and cowardly - it's a more worthwhile use of his time to pretend he's owning the Qtards living under his bed.


Why not? He makes stupid statements and I correct him. He makes poor insults and I make slightly less poor insults. Seems fair. 


Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> Lol you're still seething mad that I made fun of Qtards like you. Still Trusting The Plan?
> 
> 
> It's more amazing that you still don't get it. You think the government shouldn't let companies run themselves as they see fit. So much for small government. You're just assblasted that you got banned from Reddit


See one of the problems you have is you don't have any arguments of your own, you just regurgitate bullshit that you've been spoonfed. 

You don't know why only the government shouldn't be allowed to fuck you over. It's not that you won't articulate why, it's that you can't. 

Same thing with 'small government'. It's not something you've thought about and understood and have any opinion of your own. You've been told that and now you repeat it. You're less of a person and more of a mindless tool.

It's also why you have to make up stuff. You're the one who brought up reddit. And youtube. And (lol) communism. You're the one who seems to have a crush on Q.


----------



## Jimjamflimflam (Mar 19, 2021)

Vulva Gape said:


> Most of the people crying about muh free speech are the autistic nazis I wouldn't mind being silenced anyway, so yeah I guess I kind of see it that way.



Please silence yourself, k thx


----------



## Hollywood Hulk Hogan (Mar 19, 2021)

WhatIsThePunchline said:


> Why not? He makes stupid statements and I correct him. He makes poor insults and I make slightly less poor insults. Seems fair.
> 
> See one of the problems you have is you don't have any arguments of your own, you just regurgitate bullshit that you've been spoonfed.
> 
> ...


I ain't reading all that, but you are the one screeching that companies are allowed to moderate their own content. So which subreddit did you like that got banned?

You are arguing companies shouldn't be able to moderate their own content. That means you think that if someone writes something on your Facebook wall, for example, posting gay porn, you have to keep it up. You can't put  people on ignore. Etc... What you are arguing for is completely retarded


----------



## WhatIsThePunchline (Mar 19, 2021)

Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:


> I ain't reading all that, but you are the one screeching that companies are allowed to moderate their own content. So which subreddit did you like that got banned?
> 
> You are arguing companies shouldn't be able to moderate their own content. That means you think that if someone writes something on your Facebook wall, for example, posting gay porn, you have to keep it up. You can't put  people on ignore. Etc... What you are arguing for is completely retarded


You're referring to four lines as 'all that'. Five if you count the response to the other guy. Lol.

And I've never made that argument at all. I can understand why you're doing a Cathy Newman though. 

As for subreddits there was an instance some months ago where reddit banned around two thousand subreddits, the largest one composed of several tens of thousands of users.  Reddit had no accountability in this. The subs received no official forewarning. None of the subs could speak up in their own defense. Just immediately replaced with "Banned for 'hate' ".  Where the bans legit? Since the subs have been removed, it's difficult to tell what was on them. 

If reddit bans your subreddit, they should have to say why. I think that's a general rule that would be decent for most of the big social media platforms.

If reddit or youtube have to tell you why they are banning your sub or channel, does that stop them from moderating their content?  Maybe they could provide a small optional menu where you could select what type of content you want in your feed. If you get to be more in control of your feed, would that in any way hinder their moderation? Nope. Or how about a regulation that says if a company has a ToS they cannot discriminate in applying that ToS based on politics? Say that twitter isn't allowed to selectively enforce their rules on some and not on others, either they enforce things in a neutral and fair manner, or they get fined. If a company has to actually apply their ToS fairly, would that force them to violate their ToS? Obviously not.

No one wants to take away your ability to get yourself banned.


----------



## Syaoran Li (Mar 24, 2021)

Fuck the private corporations who have been destroying free speech and free thought for the past thirty fucking years.


----------



## potato in mah painus (Mar 24, 2021)

"To know who rules over you look to who you are not allowed to criticize." 

Its another check and balance to government and society, and a good measuring stick on how healthy both are within a country. I think a lot of people forget that not just in the US, but in hundreds of countries around the world blood was shed to secure this right.

I weep for not just the US, but the world. We are metaphorically returning to the days of the kings and queens where speaking up means loosing your head, or your family looses its heads in your stead.


----------

