You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: You cannot take away from the author that which does not belong to the author.

in Proof of Brain3 years ago

(Lies/dangerous disinformation like qAnoon, Anti-vaxxing, flat earth, NWO, Reptilian Illuminati, plandemic, etc.).

image.png
https://peakd.com/@logiczombie/re-clixmoney-quyir4

Sort:  

So if I for example decide there are no good reasons for movement X thus anyone advocating movement X must be lying then by their logic if I have sufficient power I should be able to make it possible to down vote so no one can ever be rewarded for writing about movement X again... unless they do so in a way that I approve of. Otherwise they are lying. I afterall am the arbiter of truth.

By extension a decade ago if we talk about UFOs we are lying and spreading misinformation. No one can talk about that. We can't pay for that product and by extension no one will post about it because they can't be rewarded for their time and effort.

Yet fast forward and now official sources are putting out UFO content. I guess those people that were banned were not lying.

Or how about the conspiracy theorists being called kooks because they said vaccine passports would be coming, or things like mandatory vaccination or you are fired. Those were called lies.

Yet they are now very real.

Some ASSHOLES (used the label intentionally) deciding what is the truth and what is lies should never be acceptable on this platform.

I afterall am the arbiter of truth.

Did Hive Watchers really say they go after people who prefer natural remedies over vaccines?

Yeah that is a no go. No centralizing a group that gets to decide what is lies and what is not. Answer what they think are lies with words, not with censorship.

If they must censor and cannot answer instead then who exactly is the liar. History usually shows it to be the censor though it takes time.

You either want freedom of speech or you don't. There truly is no middle ground.

That part you quoted is reason enough not to support this organization. I support going after spam, plagiarism, and abuse (mostly doxing or something serious).

Beyond that there is no reason for a down vote that I personally think is justified. Not even the reward pool. If they want to do reward pool policing then there should be a cap of an amount beyond which EVERY SINGLE post is down voted to protect the pool. This way it is not subjectively people deciding what they didn't like or find interesting themselves didn't deserve to be rewarded. It ends up being an umbrella they hide under to justify down votes based upon opinion.

I am anti-Vax, @hivewatcher, call me up and give me a Covid Vaccine which will probably kill me within a few years or less.