Poll of the Day > Youtube goes into full censorship mode

(+) Yeah! (+)

YouTube doesn't do account freezes

and if they're going to delete an account, they just do it

YouTube is a privately owned company. If they dont want him on there, they have the right to terminate his account, just as GameFAQs has the right to terminate yours or mine.
---

So what kind of stuff do they post other than saying that shootings aren't real and the survivors are "crisis actors"?
---

RCtheWSBC posted...

LaggnFragnLarry posted...

im just glad i didnt know who alex jones was till this topic

lol for real?

yea. i dont really pay attention to weird conspiracy theorists

lihlih posted...

So what kind of stuff do they post other than saying that shootings aren't real and the survivors are "crisis actors"?

Literally anything batshit crazy, the dude admitted in court he plays a character and doesn't really believe it

Sarcasthma posted...

bulbinking posted...

CNET has shills patrolling.

Give us some names. I need to know who I can and can't trust.

The only person on here I ever thought could be a shill is Zeus, and that's mostly because I just find it really sad that he sits on here defending Trump (but acting like he isn't) so much
---

Andromicus posted...

lihlih posted...

So what kind of stuff do they post other than saying that shootings aren't real and the survivors are "crisis actors"?

Literally anything batshit crazy, the dude admitted in court he plays a character and doesn't really believe it

Joe Rogan has known him for like 25 years and says that's just how he is. He is a very intense man
---

also, if his account is frozen, it's weird that a video was updated to it an hour or two ago

lihlih posted...

So what kind of stuff do they post other than saying that shootings aren't real and the survivors are "crisis actors"?

The government is putting hormones in the water to turn the frogs gay.
---

bulbinking posted...

adjl posted...

The right to free speech does not entitle you to a platform for your speech. If you want to use somebody's platform, you've gotta play by their rules.

So you are saying if I purchase the world then suddenly its my right to censorship of anybody occupying my private space?

The analog is quite clear.

Hypothetically? Yeah. Your territory, your rules. Good luck actually carrying that out, though.
---

TheWorstPoster posted...

YouTube is more or less a monopoly on video uploading sites.

Uhhhh

darkknight109 posted...

In other words: Fair, next.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

Uh-UHHHHHHH?
---

his channel is still up

surprise surprise it was all a giant lie to get more views

lol

The amount of lol I got from this topic

>Alex Jones lies about youtube deleting his channel to get more views.
>People nod and agree, "oh yes well he deserved it since he broke 'guidelines' of the site".

I mean I dont care or agree what the guy has to say but whatever just dont watch him like most people do?

How dare a private company do what you probably agreed to in that massive ToS you definitely didn't read.

@knivesX2004 posted...

How dare a private company do what you probably agreed to in that massive ToS you definitely didn't read.

Whole things a lie so jokes on you?

dioxxys posted...

@knivesX2004 posted...

How dare a private company do what you probably agreed to in that massive ToS you definitely didn't read.

Whole things a lie so jokes on you?

I think the jokes on ICOYAR
---

Cacciato posted...

dioxxys posted...

@knivesX2004 posted...

How dare a private company do what you probably agreed to in that massive ToS you definitely didn't read.

Whole things a lie so jokes on you?

I think the joke is ICOYAR

FTFY
---

adjl posted...

bulbinking posted...

adjl posted...

The right to free speech does not entitle you to a platform for your speech. If you want to use somebody's platform, you've gotta play by their rules.

So you are saying if I purchase the world then suddenly its my right to censorship of anybody occupying my private space?

The analog is quite clear.

Hypothetically? Yeah. Your territory, your rules. Good luck actually carrying that out, though.

I mean there are already several global corporations that are getting rather close.
---

adjl posted...

bulbinking posted...

adjl posted...

The right to free speech does not entitle you to a platform for your speech. If you want to use somebody's platform, you've gotta play by their rules.

So you are saying if I purchase the world then suddenly its my right to censorship of anybody occupying my private space?

The analog is quite clear.

Hypothetically? Yeah. Your territory, your rules. Good luck actually carrying that out, though.

When you join ANY website, in the terms and conditions (that nobody ever reads), it does state that you agree to abide by their rules, including what they will and won't allow concerning views and speech. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. If you violate the site's rules on what they allow in terms of speech, they have the right, as site admin, to ban you for whatever reason, or even no reason at all, if they choose, and there's no recourse for you.
---

TyVulpine posted...

adjl posted...

bulbinking posted...

adjl posted...

The right to free speech does not entitle you to a platform for your speech. If you want to use somebody's platform, you've gotta play by their rules.

So you are saying if I purchase the world then suddenly its my right to censorship of anybody occupying my private space?

The analog is quite clear.

Hypothetically? Yeah. Your territory, your rules. Good luck actually carrying that out, though.

When you join ANY website, in the terms and conditions (that nobody ever reads), it does state that you agree to abide by their rules, including what they will and won't allow concerning views and speech. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. If you violate the site's rules on what they allow in terms of speech, they have the right, as site admin, to ban you for whatever reason, or even no reason at all, if they choose, and there's no recourse for you.

And what happens when all the internet becomes privately owned? Not only will humans lose the greatest free speech platform in history, but authoritarians will be able to control information flow at a level also never before seen.

Also, why arent businesses allowed to discriminate against whoever they want, but the internet can? They both make money, pay taxes, and get benefits from their local laws.

Internet is not a new dimension. Its physical space housed in countries with laws, and people are allowed to discriminate against people (and actively do) on the internet for whatever reason.

This is fine so long as the internet is free or easily accessable to the public so everybody can have their own website to discriminate.

But instead a select few get to control the internet and choose how to treat others ability to share information, naturally breaking down free speech.

Facebook and youtube didnt use to get involved in politics, and now they are leading the narratives.

We are already in 1984 its the prolouge and we can stop it here or watch as our childrens futures become more controlled and regulated by people who only value human life based on what that person can physically produce.
---

Businesses cannot discriminate because theyre there to serve the public. The internet is not. And most internet sites are privately owned, therefore can dictate what views are allowed.
---

TyVulpine posted...

Businesses cannot discriminate because theyre there to serve the public. The internet is not. And most internet sites are privately owned, therefore can dictate what views are allowed.

Why is the internet not considered public space when it has become a required playfotm for socializing and networking in the modern age?

Again, servers and data take physical space in countries with laws and it seems people are allowed to do whatever online short of theft and direct harassment.

This is wrong, certain political and religious ideals are being heavily censored and targeted.

I remember back in 2006 when youtube was THE debate platform and people started getting targeted for all manner of things and everybody was speaking out about censorship due to corporate ownership of the internet.

Its not about seeing the future, its about picking up a god damned history book and understanding the internet has become a required part of life to remain competitive in social/physical markets in the western world.

Isnt this the reason people were wanting net neutrality? Or do people only care when it starts affecting them directly, regardless of who was being wronged before?

I really fucking hate humans sometimes... so selfish and hypocritical ALL THE TIME!
---

bulbinking posted...

TyVulpine posted...

Businesses cannot discriminate because theyre there to serve the public. The internet is not. And most internet sites are privately owned, therefore can dictate what views are allowed.

Why is the internet not considered public space when it has become a required platform for socializing and networking in the modern age?

Again, servers and data take physical space in countries with laws and it seems people are allowed to do whatever online short of theft and direct harassment.

This is wrong, certain political and religious ideals are being heavily censored and targeted.

I remember back in 2006 when youtube was THE debate platform and people started getting targeted for all manner of things and everybody was speaking out about censorship due to corporate ownership of the internet.

Its not about seeing the future, its about picking up a god damned history book and understanding the internet has become a required part of life to remain competitive in social/physical markets in the western world.

Isnt this the reason people were wanting net neutrality? Or do people only care when it starts affecting them directly, regardless of who was being wronged before?

I really fucking hate humans sometimes... so selfish and hypocritical ALL THE TIME!

Because no websites are publicly owned is why. Amazon, ebay, Gamefaqs, yahoo, etc. All privately owned. That's why freedom of speech doesn't exist on the internet. You're always required to abide by the site owner's terms, which includes the right to terminate your account for speech they don't approve of (happened to me once on a comic's forums, when I said I wanted to hit GWB in the face with a pie. The site's owner/top admin, who is infamous for his far-right views, demanded I delete the post and post an apology to the forums for it. I refused, and he banned me, claiming "threats of assault against others will not be tolerated")
---

Gotta love how much Conservatives praise free market capitalism and then turn around being mad at companies exercising their rights of operating within a capitalist society.
---

kangolcone posted...

Gotta love how much Conservatives praise free market capitalism and then turn around being mad at companies exercising their rights of operating within a capitalist society.

Population control to create a more susceptible consumer base to mindlessly consume products goes against the facets of a true open market and such manipulation tactics are illegal for irl municiplaties to enage in for that very reason.

Either apply a countries laws to people who who run websites within said countries (most do already) create a public option so entire groups of people cant be muscled out of a social space online through censorship copyright harassment, or make everybody completely anonymous and ban anybody that tries to elivate thier opinions online by using irl fame or influence to peer pressure others into believing them.

If one of these isnt dont the internet will turn into the biggest tool of individual control and oppression humanity has never known.

Just look at how the internet works in China.

You are telling me you WANT that, because without protections for speech online, thats where we are headed.

Also, the government regulates the internet more than you think. I thought libs were in favor of net neitrality. I guess they think throttling less desirable ideas is fine after all?
---

Im all for net neutrality, but that only applies to ensuring internet providers dont favor themselves or their allies and try to squeeze out the competition. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
---

private companies have the right to moderate their sites; and users have to right to call out their crappiness, discrimination, bigotry, closemindedness, unfair practices, and violation of human rights.

the extreme methods such dominant, public facing sites and platforms employ in order to force their liberal ideology down users' throats, and to snuff out opposition viewpoints, is no cause for alarm. not until these huge companies take control of 100% of the internet, at least.
---

Amuseum posted...

private companies have the right to moderate their sites; and users have to right to call out their crappiness, discrimination, bigotry, closemindedness, unfair practices, and violation of human rights.

Yeah, good luck reporting to the internet police. Oh, wait....
---

Amuseum posted...

private companies have the right to moderate their sites; and users have to right to call out their crappiness, discrimination, bigotry, closemindedness, unfair practices, and violation of human rights.

the extreme methods such dominant, public facing sites and platforms employ in order to force their liberal ideology down users' throats, and to snuff out opposition viewpoints, is no cause for alarm. not until these huge companies take control of 100% of the internet, at least.

How the fuck is somebody going to violate human rights on a youtube video?
---

http://www.dailymotion.com/
https://vimeo.com/

You're welcome.

Awesome!
---

Some people don't even know what rights they have. That's why it's so easy to take away and deny them.
---

Amuseum posted...

Some people don't even know what rights they have. That's why it's so easy to take away and deny them.

OMG, yes.... The amount of people I've heard bitch about work-related stuff that's actually not allowed is insane. Everyone has this fucking brain damage that makes them think their boss is "the king of the company" and can arbitrarily fire anybody for no reason. The worst part is when you inform them that they can refuse (or whatever) and if there are consequences they can sue or contact the government, they just act all wimpy and uncomfortable, like they require themselves to be devalued. I've seriously stopped talking to people because they just bitch about things they can fix but make no attempt to do so, over and over and over. It's super annoying. I mean, if they aren't willing to confront the problem, that's fine, but stop crying to me about it.
---

TheCyborgNinja posted...

Amuseum posted...

Some people don't even know what rights they have. That's why it's so easy to take away and deny them.

OMG, yes.... The amount of people I've heard bitch about work-related stuff that's actually not allowed is insane. Everyone has this fucking brain damage that makes them think their boss is "the king of the company" and can arbitrarily fire anybody for no reason. The worst part is when you inform them that they can refuse (or whatever) and if there are consequences they can sue or contact the government, they just act all wimpy and uncomfortable, like they require themselves to be devalued. I've seriously stopped talking to people because they just bitch about things they can fix but make no attempt to do so, over and over and over. It's super annoying. I mean, if they aren't willing to confront the problem, that's fine, but stop crying to me about it.

In a number of states in the US, you can be fired for nor real reason.
---