They are getting downvoted because they are making a bad faith argument. They state banning a for profit website for not complying with the laws is somehow equal to censorship, this is obviously not true.
I don’t care if they pull the plug on Twitter. My point was that if the EU bans one website, it sets a precedent for the future where it’s easier to do it again. The rules that could lead to Twitter being banned today might be sane but who knows about the future? Maybe they start blanket banning Lemmy or Mastodon instances if the fediverse grows so large that moderation can’t keep up?
No, he is being downvoted for pretending that enforcing rules = censorship… Which is common spin attempt of assholes thinking rules don’t apply to them.
We don’t need a precedent for the EU censoring the internet.
Love you’re getting down voted for being against censorship, lemmy hivemind at it’s finest
They are getting downvoted because they are making a bad faith argument. They state banning a for profit website for not complying with the laws is somehow equal to censorship, this is obviously not true.
I don’t care if they pull the plug on Twitter. My point was that if the EU bans one website, it sets a precedent for the future where it’s easier to do it again. The rules that could lead to Twitter being banned today might be sane but who knows about the future? Maybe they start blanket banning Lemmy or Mastodon instances if the fediverse grows so large that moderation can’t keep up?
No, he is being downvoted for pretending that enforcing rules = censorship… Which is common spin attempt of assholes thinking rules don’t apply to them.
He’s not “pretending”, that’s literally all censorship is. If censorship is not enforced it’s just a localised ban.
Yup, so many sheep who look at the up/downvote trend on a comment and just follow.