3 ms·
I'd have to imagine it's the same as the list of motivations one would provide for disabling comments, which I've seen happen on plenty of sites.
by anoonmoose 11y ago
I'd have to imagine it's the same as the list of motivations one would provide for disabling comments, which I've seen happen on plenty of sites.
- gkop 11y agoMotivations for disabling comments vary widely, for one thing. For another, Genius is a company with a history of controversy. I can imagine some sites being ok with universal annotations but averse to Genius. It'd be useful to know how Genius is going about things wrong, because I dream of someday having a universal annotation layer that doesn't provoke widespread blocking.
- chatmasta 11y agoYou mean like how CNN disables comments so that people are unable to call them out on their bullshit? So they can post fearmongering articles with little basis in reality, backed up by quotes from unnamed anonymous "intelligence sources?" So they can continue to spread misinformation on behalf of the US government without anyone questioning it? The mainstream media is a complete poison to society. It needs to be dismantled and ripped apart. It's a dark, dark villain that needs to be exposed to the sunlight and shown for the monster that it is. That would be easier if comments were allowed on "publications" like CNN, but unfortunately they're disabled. Personally, I am fully in support of federated "overlay" commenting systems like news genius, because they rightfully remove control/moderation over the comments from the publisher, and place it into the hands of a "trusted 3rd party" (genius).