@_elena Too bad, it started really well but I think I'm won't be able to finish the form and send my answer.
"Do you think public institutions should"
- be required to be on *all* existing social networks (no, of course no, they're *public* so they shouldn't have the right to use a platform which doesn't respect the *public will* aka the law: and currently that excludes all the ones from big tech since they refuse to pay their taxes and support bigotry, general hatred and, more precisely these days, genocide)
- favor BigTech (no, obviously no, did you read what I just wrote?)
- diversify their presence on several platforms, including fediverse (no, again, they should not be allowed to encourage things that go against basic human rights, remember you're public, so you're supposed to include people like you and me who are now official okay-to-kill-on-sight targets)
- choose freely (in a sense, yeah, because the public not being able to will what's against its will — tautological — it can't choose BigTech if it chooses *freely* would argue Rousseau, but I know perfectly what you mean and no, since existing laws are never enforced these days, sorry but yes, we do need a new law that says that existing laws must be respected and hence no, you don't have the right to choose fascists, at least not until the constitution has been rewritten to explicitly state that human rights doesn't apply to minorities)
- I don't know (yeah, perfect, if I disagree with you, it certainly means that I'm not informed enough to form an opinion)
That's the only question which doesn't have an "other" option. Are you taking this seriously,
@cercle ?