Totalitarians, fascists and other scary governments prosecute you without telling you what you did, and everybody agrees that this is an evil practice. But now it's normal and accepted on social media

EleventhHour

If you took your own advice, you wouldn’t have so many comments of yours deleted.

missingno

What exactly do you mean by "prosecution" in the context of social media?

Nougat

Censorship is suppression or prohibition of speech

by government. Private entities don't have to enable your speech if they don't want to.

[email protected]

If it makes you happy to call it that, then fine. But comparing that to government actually suppressing your speech is childish and lacking any nuance or common sense.

[email protected]

Come on. It literally fits the definition.

But instead of wallowing in semantic quibbles, let's address my actual point.

[email protected]

Penalizing a transgressor.

[email protected]

Oh so network television doesn’t employ censors? Your distinction of government censorship is just flat out incorrect.

You’re confusing censorship with freedom of speech. And I’m arguing the same point as you about private entities hosting your speech.

[email protected]

How does being a moderator make one an expert on common decency?

[email protected]

Seeing as how this is a conversation involving us, doesn't that make it "our house"? I mean without us, the whole point of the "house" ceases to exist.

Think about that.

But back to my actual point. Please.

[email protected]

I already addressed it. You can say what you want, and private websites have no argument to host literally anything that you want to say.

Why don’t you try addressing my actual point this time instead of quibbling on semantics. I already granted that you can call it censorship, but that does not equate with what is meant when people discuss government censorship.

[email protected]

But that does not address my point. My point was that it is evil to "disinvite" without explanation.

EleventhHour

One needed not to be an expert to see that your comment were inappropriate and broke the rules.

[email protected]

We are censored and banned. This is the form of prosecution to which I refer. This is obvious. Let's not quibble over semantics.

If you will read my post, I do not refer to the prosecution. I refer to prosecution without explanation.

[email protected]

So it's just efficient? Ok.

Explaining your actions may be the right thing to do but right is not the point. Control is the point.

And 99% of the people here never say anything deviant enough to get censored over anyway. So what's a few edge cases.

That's kinda cynical, which I can appreciate.

[email protected]

Sure, you and I can kick anyone out of your houses for any reason or no reason. But it's kind of a duck move to not tell the person you're booting what they did.

[email protected]

You know what's appropriate, the moderator knows what's appropriate, and anybody who disagrees is wrong.

And anybody who asks for an explanation is just trolling.

That's a rather massive and arrogant assumption.

Rhaedas

In a federated social media you can literally either find a group instance with a similar mindset as you that will let you post whatever it is you feel is being censored, or you can set up your own instance and be totally free to post it. That post and/or your instance might get blocked by others, but you have full freedom to put it there to be blocked. If you think people have to read what you say without the option to not read more, then that's a different thing altogether and you might rethink your points. It's a form of "if everyone is an asshole..."

[email protected]

They mean "persecution"

[email protected]

OP is confusing "prosecution" with "persecution", thus making this whole thread impenetrable

[email protected]

Check the modlog, they usually cite which rule was broken. I think "evil" is a pretty strong word, unfair maybe, but lots of things are unfair without being evil.