Bluesky Post (this was also posted on twitter)
I was hoping to find a statement from the aggressor, but it seems to be too early.
this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
1769 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
59963 readers
3257 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's it anti video games to point out something that is actually happening? Just because you love the company doesn't mean that any bad news is an attack against the industry. Valve doesn't want to moderate their forums, it was bound to happen.
Of course! Big government needs to save us from our 1st amendment rights. Thanks so much. I don't think I'd have figured it out without your help.
1st amendment applies to public spaces, not a forum owned by a private company.
Seems to me it's quite public because anyone can access their space by simply creating a free account. You've seemingly equated the letter of the law to the spirit.
edit: What the above poster isn't legally understanding is quasi-public spaces. Ethically, they're simply failing entirely.
That's not the definition of the word public in this context. The sidewalk is public space, a shopping mall is private space, one is managed by the State, the other by a private corporation. Go and do Nazi salutes in a shopping mall and sue them when security throws you out and you'll understand the difference.
There you go again with the letter over the spirit. You'd have us replace judges with computers.
They mall doesn't have to tresspass a person that's doing Nazi salutes. If you'd the faintest concept of the ideology of justice as implemented in the US you'd understand the difference.
I'm explaining how the first amendment works to you, that's all. Freedom of speech doesn't apply in spaces owned by private corporations, they can limit your speech in any way shape or form they want as long as you're on their turf.
You keep explaining the letter of the law, poorly, to someone that understands both the law and justice system much better than yourself.
Don't think you do buddy! Do you think you can sue a shop owner if they throw you out because you're saying things they don't like?
If you know so much about the first amendment and it doesn't apply to Internet forums and platforms, how come you're not rich from suing Twitter or something?
All strawman.
The shopping mall is not legally obligated to eject the Nazi.
But, you think government should force action upon the private entity because the majority disagrees with Nazis.
That's exactly the opposite of why the 1st Amendment exists. Everyone else learned this when they studied why someone can burn the flag or why the ACLU supports Satanists.
I've no want for your nonsense. And, you do a disservice to others by repeating it. Go learn about quasi public spaces.
You're the only one who keeps talking about the government here
No one else is, people are denouncing the fact that there's a lack of moderation on their forums, they're not asking the government to intervene.
That's not a question. Your loss.
I know, it's hard to admit that you built your whole argument around a lack of reading comprehension :(