No, he is being downvoted for pretending that enforcing rules = censorship… Which is common spin attempt of assholes thinking rules don’t apply to them.
Comment on Like Brazil, the European Union also has an X problem.
DudeDudenson@lemmings.world 2 weeks agoLove you’re getting down voted for being against censorship, lemmy hivemind at it’s finest
14th_cylon@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
PaellaVacuum@reddeet.com 1 week ago
He’s not “pretending” that’s literally all censorship is. If censorship is not enforced it’s just a localised ban.
ICastFist@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
Yeah, because all censorship is evil /s
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
When done by the government, yes it is. When done by multinational mega corporations, yes it is. When a teacher takes the swear words out of a school play, it’s not a big deal.
PaellaVacuum@reddeet.com 1 week ago
Yup, so many sheep who look at the up/downvote trend on a comment and just follow.
Thorry84@feddit.nl 2 weeks ago
They are getting downvoted because they are making an bad faith argument. They state banning a for profit website for not complying with the laws is somehow equal to censorship, this is obviously not true.
Geometrinen_Gepardi@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
I don’t care if they pull the plug on Twitter. My point was that if the EU bans one website, it sets a precedent for the future where it’s easier to do it again. The rules that could lead to Twitter being banned today might be sane but who knows about the future? Maybe they start blanket banning Lemmy or Mastodon instances if the fediverse grows so large that moderation can’t keep up?