Derek Powazek ๐I wonder if people using mastodon know that, without section 230, no one could legally afford to run a mastodon instance in the US. Section 230 protects what we do here every day. Politicians threatening 230 are threatening free speech on the internet.
Iโm not going to educate you. Fucking look it up. While you still can.
Like I said, Iโm not going to educate you. But if you think the problem with 230 is that bad people post bad things on the internet, you donโt have a problem with 230, you have a problem with the First Amendment.
https://www.techdirt.com/2020/11/02/your-problem-is-not-with-section-230-1st-amendment/
And besides, without 230 sites would have LESS incentive to moderate content, not more. 230 PROTECTS MODERATION.
If you have a problem with bad content on bad sites, you have a problem with THOSE SITES, NOT 230.
bobocubedHence the brilliance of the Fediverse. Those bad sites: disconnected. The ultimate in moderation.
Stefan Midjich ๊ฎา@boelder what if sites are wrongly disconnected without any real evidence? and what if this is then spread virally to people who don't even know why the site was blocked to begin with?
it can happen to you! ๐ฎ
Sammy ๐ฆ@sammy @boelder of course it happened. not that you'll believe my word over the admins of huge instances like mastodon.art, but that is exactly what happened. one guy with a grudge spread around that mastodon.se was full of fascists and now we're on the same blocklists as gab.com and truth social. and instead of fighting it I chose to just shutdown. the blocklists just forked off each other and kept spreading virally.