People that say they believe "all censorship is bad" don't actually believe it. They too actually have to draw a line, but hate to admit it. For example, I have a random-string-generator spam bot that would love to fill their inbox non stop and reply to everything they say, at a rate of, say, 1 message per second.

Where's those defenders for the garbled unintelligible meaningless spam?

@cj Can't say I'm on-board with the analogy. Someone auto-bouncing e-mails, or blocking a specific sender, wouldn't be censorship even if the content was not meaningless spam.

The fact that I have a right to say something doesn't mean you need to let me come into your house to rant about it.

People confuse those two all too often.

@ricardojmendez I think this is just arguing over what the word "censorship" means. Which isn't very interesting to me.

Follow

@cj No need to argue, there is a standard definition: being suppressed or prohibited from saying something.

Me choosing not to listen to someone, or not paying for them to say it (which server costs would do) doesn’t fall under that.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!