zlacker

>>prawn+(OP)
The wave of bans from the muskjet thing has been quite dramatic.

It'll be interesting to see if the people who've been lauding musk for his supposedly pro free speech attitudes will reckon with what's been happening in actuality, or if they'll just accept this as "freedom for me but not for thee".

>>c54+C6
The people who cheered Musk for his "pro free speech" attitude don't actually believe or want free speech. They want free speech for themselves and censorship for people they don't like.

See the terrorist attacks against Drag Queens.

>>cmh89+mn
I don't know why it's so impossible to believe there are people who truly do want free speech.

I wasn't sure if Musk was going to deliver it, but I tried to remain open-minded. I did think previous Twitter management leaned left with some admittedly difficult moderation decisions, but obviously I'm finding out that Musk is even less supportive of true free speech.

Ironically this banning of Mastodon links is the #1 thing pushing me to start exploring Mastodon or other platforms.

>>ditona+9u
It's impossible to believe because we know people who say that, and we know that their fundamental belief is that rules exist in two ways: 1) to protect and serve a certain class, without binding them, and 2) to bind the other class, without protecting the other class.

This is not a new phenomenon, the only thing that changes is the terms used to signal the meaning.

>>epista+Bz
That is extremely flawed logic. It is logically equivalent to "We know there are counterfeit dollars, therefore there cannot be real ones."

Sure, there are phonies. Therefore it is impossible to believe that anyone is genuine? No.