infinite_assTotalitarians, 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
NONEYou’re talking about Banning or Canceling?. Either way, is wild to compare prosecution with any of those things.
Actually, censorship is the #1 form of prosecution for scary governments.
Sorry, I sometimes forget who I’m talking to.
“Scary Governments”
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.
It 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!
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?
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.
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.
My point was the indecency of prosecution without explanation.
It’s impractical too, to boot somebody without telling them why, as somebody else in this thread pointed out.
Another person in this thread suggested that such discussions are wasted effort. That such discussion, and the healthy society it engenders, is not the aim if those in control. Who are the mods’ bosses. That they simply want max control for min cost.
Using inflammatory language as a way to make your point seem more valid is just manipulative, and betrays the general lack of a point that you have.
You were not “prosecuted”, and I’ll be generous and assume you meant “persecuted”, which again is such an inappropriate use of that word given the mildness of the indecency you experienced.
Is it a dick move to ban without explanation? Yes. Most sites don’t do that though, so I assume you have some very specific grievance that prompted this.
You weren’t banned from the world, and there are many instances in the fediverse, so take your speech to any number of instances where the mods aren’t dicks.
Most sites don’t do that though
Actually, it’s the rule in Lemmy and Reddit. Google’s Playstore has a similar policy.
So yes, ubiquitous. A perversion worth discussing. So here we are.