• Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Since Musk took over, the censorship requests went from 50% accepted to 80% accepted.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s fucking unreal just how completely lost you magats are. Just fucking upside down in relation to any sort of reality.

          This is just too hilarious. The people that are completely out of touch with reality are people like you who say things like this.

          • Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Says the guy who actually believes that felon musk doesn’t censor the everliving fuck out of any sort of dissenting view on his privately owned nazi platform.

            Just. wow.

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              3 days ago

              But there are “dissenting views” all over X? Pro-Democrat policy and ideology views are not censored. Pro Trans/Palestine/Abortion/every-other-left-wing views are not being censored.

              Which views are being censored on X in America? What evidence do you have to support your claim?

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Clearly, because even that article is bullshit and couldn’t find 10 despite naming it “Elon Musk, King of Censorship: 10 Times the ‘Free Speech Absolutist’ Silenced Twitter Users” lol

              Government ordered takedowns are not Twitter censoring people - it’s the government.

              As for “cis” and “cisgender” - they’re considered slurs on there, but they’re not censored. You can go on there and post “cisgender” as much as you want.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  12
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  They operate within the law. If a government says you either ban an account in their country or you stop providing your service to the entire country, which do you think X should do? Because those are the options - follow the law or exit the country.

                  X are challenging the government legal orders in court btw, but in the meantime they have to cooperate. Like I said, the government are the ones censoring free speech here, not X. Do you not see the difference? To operate in a country you need to follow their laws. Not every country has free speech constitutionally guaranteed btw.

      • Anas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Thought people would recognize this username and start ignoring them by now. Stop feeding the trolls, kids.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          31
          ·
          3 days ago

          That’s not censorship. You can still post with that word and it doesn’t get deleted. It just won’t get spread as far and wide. All your followers etc will still see it.

          • Lemminary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            It just won’t get spread as far and wide.

            It’s being blocked from being read or seen, as per the definition. They are quite literally censoring a word for political reasons in line with their political agenda. Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              28
              ·
              3 days ago

              Do you think they should classify the “n word” as a slur and limit its reach? Is that censorship?

              Cis isn’t being blocked from being seen or read.

              • Lemminary@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                First, don’t fall into the trap of confusing censorship with moderation. Second, don’t confuse the world’s richest man’s sad attempt at fueling culture wars with plain racism.

                I used to use Twitter and I know for a fact that it’s literally being limited by not allowing it to be read or seen, appearing under one of those disclaimers at the bottom of a thread that was caught by the filter and in practice functions as a convenient dustbin to silence discourse. And you said it yourself, it’s being treated differently by preventing its diffusion and visibility.

                Or tell me, why is a neutral word like cisgender being censored at all? But spare me the gaslighting.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  15
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  I know for a fact that it’s literally being limited by not allowing it to be read or seen

                  How do you know this? If you can’t see it or read it, how do you know this?

                  And you said it yourself, it’s being treated differently by preventing its diffusion and visibility.

                  That isn’t censorship.

                  Or tell me, why is a neutral word like cisgender being censored at all? But spare me the gaslighting.

                  Again - it’s not being censored. You don’t get posts removed for saying it. You don’t get banned. The term is a controversial one, it’s not “neutral”. “Cisgender” has no need to even exist as a word. You don’t need a word to mean “not trans”, which is 99.99% of the population. The word “transgender” existing negates a need for “cisgender” to exist. “Cisgender” is really only ever used as an insult, which is why it’s treated as such. There’s no word for “not blind”, because not being blind is the default, the standard.

                  First, don’t fall into the trap of confusing censorship with moderation.

                  It’s funny you say that. Moderation that removes all differing opinions, and bans people who express them, is censorship. Limiting the reach of posts deemed “hateful”, while not removing them or banning the person posting them, is not censorship.

                  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    How do you know this? If you can’t see it or read it, how do you know this?

                    Because it’s been reported by the news that I cited.

                    That isn’t censorship.

                    It’s the literal definition. Just because it’s thinly veiled as a moderation measure by a billionaire doesn’t mean that the core concept doesn’t apply. Like I said, don’t confuse it either way.

                    You don’t get posts removed for saying it. You don’t get banned.

                    And like I said, censorship is not only when your content gets removed or you get banned. You can have a similar effect with different mechanisms that effectively render content invisible, and I find it disingenuous of you not to consider that.

                    “Cisgender” has no need to even exist as a word.
                    You don’t need a word to mean “not trans”,

                    Brother, we have created entire fictional languages for less, and have names for concepts you can’t even conceive of. Your argument is fragile. And your monolignualism is showing with those nearsighted takes.

                    “Cisgender” is really only ever used as an insult,

                    Cisgender has been thrown at Musk and his supporters because they treat it as an insult. Don’t even. lol

                    Limiting the reach of posts deemed “hateful”, while not removing them or banning the person posting them, is not censorship.

                    It’s most definitely a form of censorship, and I will die on this hill tonight.