@dantheman I have to reply to myself because you jumped into a conversation 5th reply in and there for I cant reply to you.
you say:
If you followed your own principles, then I would create offensive articles and demand you publish them in your paper. When you fail to publish them (because your audience doesn't want to read it), then I will accuse you of censorship (your definition).
no one is demanding anything. if you want to publish something in an actual newspaper unless you work for that newspaper you have to pay. If you are willing to pay the cost that anyone else pays to publish content and the news paper said no because they don't agree with you opinion then it is censorship.
When you fail to publish them (because your audience doesn't want to read it), then I will accuse you of censorship (your definition).
so a strawman? do you even logic bro?
In my mind neither paper is censoring anyone. Your definition of censorship includes filtering of spam, phishing attempts, and fraudulent or inaccurate information.
who made you the all ending and all that matters opinion on what is "spam, phishing attempts, and fraudulent or inaccurate information"?
-fucking swear-
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: