FLOOF

joined 1 week ago
[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ha ha. What is the plan of this invisible deity?

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

You can see the reason cited.

In almost all cases you cannot see who did it.

Any conversation about it is, as a rule, private

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Don't understand >> troll.

That's efficient

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I heard about this big Christian from a hundred years ago who doubted the existence of time, space and physical objects. I like that guy.

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yeah, but once the power is there it will be used for less legit reasons, like removing "saying nice stuff about the wrong politician".

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We're talking about removing stuff at the judgment of the presiding authority.

Rationale is infinitely flexible. It will never be science. So it cannot be relied upon.

So, ideals aside, consider it in that light. Be realistic.

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You got a better one?

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

Well we have this upvoting/downvoting paradigm. Simple and popular. Maybe that could be developed further.

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But sometimes you are wrong.

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Refer to the replies of others here who are having less difficulty than you. Use the power of Lemmy.

[–] FLOOF@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That's a good point.

Prosecution might then assert that it was your responsibility to employ a system that DID allow for censorship. But I hate that one.

Another option would be to refer the offender to the LEOs. Just shift responsibility. Heck, it could be said that you're doing the LEOs a service. I like that one.

view more: next ›