For how long this is, it’s very confusing. Some links also didn’t work. This reads like someone who is way overly invested in their reddit account though. Like, I doubt you’ll find any lawyer in the US who will go to bat over you getting banned. Privately owned (as in not government-owned, so regardless of any possible IPOs in the future) companies have freedom of speech which gives them the right to censor whoever and however they want. We don’t need to like it, but it is what it is. I’m personally ok with them being allowed to censor whatever they want because I don’t want to get into the mess of the government defining what speech is or isn’t against the law. I’d be maybe ok with drawing a line on incitement and/or active assistance to violate laws or another’s rights, but that’s about it. But there is no right to have speech or say what you want on someone else’s platform.
Does this make reddit dangerous? Absolutely not.
You did learn a lesson.
Don’t pour yourself into work that someone else owns. You can easily lose it.
It sounds like it was a harsh lesson for you. I sympathize. But I don’t know what else you expect from a for-profit corporation.
You’re on an alternative. They already exist. You’re also preaching to people who already agree alternatives are important.
Edit: added a word for clarity because some people can’t carry context from one sentence to another.
I think your comments are a huge oversimplification of the arguments I made.
You’re on an alternative. They already exist. You’re also preaching to people who already agree alternatives are important.
Indeed. I’m sharing information to keep people informed, and hopefully we can have good discussion (leading to action) on the various pros and cons of reddit alternatives.
For how long this is, it’s very confusing. Some links also didn’t work. This reads like someone who is way overly invested in their reddit account though. Like, I doubt you’ll find any lawyer in the US who will go to bat over you getting banned. Privately owned (as in not government-owned, so regardless of any possible IPOs in the future) companies have freedom of speech which gives them the right to censor whoever and however they want. We don’t need to like it, but it is what it is. I’m personally ok with them being allowed to censor whatever they want because I don’t want to get into the mess of the government defining what speech is or isn’t against the law. I’d be maybe ok with drawing a line on incitement and/or active assistance to violate laws or another’s rights, but that’s about it. But there is no right to have speech or say what you want on someone else’s platform.
Does this make reddit dangerous? Absolutely not.
You did learn a lesson.
Don’t pour yourself into work that someone else owns. You can easily lose it.
It sounds like it was a harsh lesson for you. I sympathize. But I don’t know what else you expect from a for-profit corporation.
You’re on an alternative. They already exist. You’re also preaching to people who already agree alternatives are important.
Edit: added a word for clarity because some people can’t carry context from one sentence to another.
Okay, I totally agree with your argument here but
is an objectively funny statement. Who else do you think generally does this?
Defining what speech is against the law. Out of context it’s humorous, but I would have thought it was obvious in context.
What does that even mean
What speech is determined to be against the law.
Jfc people. Context. If I had a nickel for everyone who didn’t get it, I’d have 10 cents, but it’s weird it happened twice.
I think your comments are a huge oversimplification of the arguments I made.
Indeed. I’m sharing information to keep people informed, and hopefully we can have good discussion (leading to action) on the various pros and cons of reddit alternatives.