Because #Substack doesn't allow sex workers to post anything "pornographic" means they've decided that there absolutely is a line that cannot be crossed on their platform and they have now said OUT LOUD that literal Nazis do not cross that line.
Un-fucking-believable.
@jann @drewphish Substack:
we don't like Nazis, but censoring them makes the problem worse.
also Substack:
we don't like sexual content, but censoring it is a good idea.
Consistency is overrated. Besides, there's money involved.
@fuller @jann @drewphish So... you're saying that SubStack, funded by Andreeson Horowitz, is happy to look at content on their site, classify that content into "sexual" and "hate speech" buckets, then throws out the stuff in the "sexual" bucket and leave up the "hate speech" bucket (even though their terms of service reject hate speech)?
And that it's too difficult / expensive / risky to create a third bucket just for "Backpage"-like business solicitations to be thrown out?
And this situation is somehow the fault of a US federal law?
That explanation is certainly a *possibility*.
I can think of alternative explanations that have fewer assumptions.
@fuller @grumble209 @jann @drewphish And? If they truly believed in free speech, they should be willing to go the extra distance to FOSTA-SESTA level content being allowed.
Because my immediate thought is this ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Act_of_1850 ) - at one point it was illegal to free slaves...that says nothing about whether or not people *did* free slaves even when it was against the law (
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_Railroad ).
Drew but 7/27/25 GA ➡️ Reprise
(((Jann Gobble)))🏳️🌈
aardvark
Grumble
פולר
Alexander The 1st