How did these indexes messure "freedom"? Canada has hate speech laws that will throw you in jail for critising the importation of millions of street shitters to the nation. New Zealand was trying to throw people in prison for just looking at the Christchurch footage and banned sites like 4chan from the country for not censoring that content and refusing to give the data of the users who posted that content.
I feel like most people in this thread are like 60-80% agreed on the issue at hand. It’s that 20-40% where we disagree on the method to solve it.
Yeah, as someone into firearms I can see your perspective. A huge issue with guns is people not enforcing laws. You have cases where a homeless black guy is shooting cans in a residential area (illegal) and then days later he shoots up a place. They then try to pass new laws restricting shit when the issue was not enforcing the laws.
That’s more or less what they mean. It’s Orwellian.
It’s entirely arbitrary and any so-called objective standards are based on what copes they can employ so Europeans can disingenuously one-up the United States.
The free speech absolutist to lolicon turbo-janny phenomenon is pretty demonstrable and repeatable.
This idea you need to actively police your user base is fucking gay. It’s gay when this faggot and the payment processors do it to null, it was gay when null did it to DSP. Just because you think it’s justified because it’s “your issue” you’re pressuring on doesn’t make you any less of a fag. Proper gate keeping is maintaining standards on what topics are not appropriate to see from your audience when they are participating as your audience.
TAL, just make an account here already.
They don't want to be seen as pedophiles and are often pedos in denial. I remember a month or so back they were infighting over if its actually not pedophilia to jerk off to the girl in the game 'pragmata', said girl was realistically modelled of an actual prepubescent child and yet you had some lolicons saying it wasn't pedophillia because "it's just fiction CHUD". The lolicons arguing against it many only called it out after hearing it was modelled of an actual child, meaning they would be completely fine if people jerked off to the realistic 3d model of a child as long as it wasn't modelled of any actual children.
Well there was an actual pedophile that messed with Rackets. Josh promptly banned the fucker when he found out. Something that TAL failed to mention. As for me: Its my avatar. I have explained it multiple fucking times. It is a JPEG. I'm not actually going to give a fuck what some pedophile has to say about my borgar pfp.
No I’m aware of that too. And while his attempt to directly interact with Nick is ban-worthy on that merit, the lens was only turned on him like it was because these faggots will use audience policing as a cudgel. Regardless, TAL is a total faggot here.
I wonder if my non-AI avatar would’ve gotten shit. The passenger is gentleman.
Didn't Rackets already insinuate that Legal
I mean he jerks off to drawings of kids, no shit he's a faggot
Josh literally had no control over that one fucking dude. When he found out, that guy was nuked from orbit. You couldn't have asked for a better response.
Borgars are all but a human right!
Yeah, Rekieta typically implies pedophilia if not outright calling you a pedophile or will insult your physical appearance and call you a pedophile. His comment on Meme Copium was the more bizarre by saying that Meme Copium”fantasies about how their buttholes look in candlelight”. Very bizarre and I wish Montagraph was able to afford seeing the defamation case through.
Josh has been pretty consistent about his stance and how it’s evolved over time. The fuzzy hash part of the Rekieta saga was also a good insight.
