You aren’t being “censored”, and you don’t have a point. You can spout whatever shitty point of view got you banned on the street with a sign if you want, nobody will stop you.
Censorship is suppression or prohibition of speech. As I already said, you’re free to say whatever you want, so you are not being censored. When you go outside to touch grass, as has been suggested, then you can practice saying whatever you want to whomever you see!
If you think privately hosted websites are obligated to host whatever garbage the worst of the Internet can create, because deleting anything ever is “censorship”, then you are wrong. Imagine being so entitled!
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 in that same comment, so not sure why you feel the need to point it out to me.
In the context of this post by butthurt OP who doesn’t understand things, the distinction between censorship and violation of free speech is way too complicated.
When your post is removed, that’s literally suppression of speech. Therefore it falls under the term “censorship”. I feel pedantic to drive that into the ground like this. But how is this not clear?
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.
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.
Actually, censorship is the #1 form of prosecution for scary governments.
Sorry, I sometimes forget who I’m talking to.
Fella, go outside, breath fresh air, eat something you like and please get over that banning you receive some time ago.
You’re starting to sound like a 12 year old.
Maybe. But in the meantime let’s discuss my point.
You aren’t being “censored”, and you don’t have a point. You can spout whatever shitty point of view got you banned on the street with a sign if you want, nobody will stop you.
Actually, when they remove your post, that’s literal censorship. Look it up.
Censorship is suppression or prohibition of speech. As I already said, you’re free to say whatever you want, so you are not being censored. When you go outside to touch grass, as has been suggested, then you can practice saying whatever you want to whomever you see!
If you think privately hosted websites are obligated to host whatever garbage the worst of the Internet can create, because deleting anything ever is “censorship”, then you are wrong. Imagine being so entitled!
by government. Private entities don’t have to enable your speech if they don’t want to.
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 in that same comment, so not sure why you feel the need to point it out to me.
Generally speaking, yes, they’re different.
In the context of this post by butthurt OP who doesn’t understand things, the distinction between censorship and violation of free speech is way too complicated.
When your post is removed, that’s literally suppression of speech. Therefore it falls under the term “censorship”. I feel pedantic to drive that into the ground like this. But how is this not clear?
It’s literally not.
If you come into my house and say something I don’t approve of, I can kick your ass out.
If Facebook or Reddit doesn’t like it, they can kick you out.
If a Lemmy mod doesn’t like it, they can kick you out.
Make your own site and say whatever you want IN YOUR OWN HOUSE, and nobody can stop you.
If it’s not worth making your own site, then you are more concerned with being heard than being censored.
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.
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.
Come on. It literally fits the definition.
But instead of wallowing in semantic quibbles, let’s address my actual point.
Do you mean persecution? Do you understand that those are different things?
Ya we already discussed that elsewhere. Close enough. My point doesn’t take a doctorate to grasp.