6 ms·

> If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. You'd first have to

> If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. You'd first have to define controversial, a difficult task when dealing with the 'net: * Communism - fine in Sweden, frowned upon in former Soviet satellite states * Marihuana - forbidden in Sweden, allowed in Canada and parts of the US, tolerated in the Netherlands * Women in revealing clothing - fine in western Europe, forbidden in islamic countries (for a recent example see [1]) * Antisemitism - forbidden in most of western Europe, daily fare on TV in many islamic countries * ... This list goes on, where do you draw the line? It would end up being a very bland service when everyone who is even slightly controversial is kicked off. So bland, actually, that the service would never obtain mainstream acceptance. [1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-actress-charged-obscene-act-wearing-revealing-dress/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-actress... - not exactly revealing to 'western' standards, enough for 5 years in prison according to the Egyptian prosecutor

odessacubbage 8y ago
maybe a good compromise would be to base frontpage content on regional broadcast standards as that seems to be a pretty reliable measure for what is considered acceptable and then simply relegate the other content within it's own 'after dark' category, available to registered users. this is essentially how we handled things back in the era of video stores and it still seems applicable imo; keep the content, just bring back the curtain.
- Yetanfou 8y ago
  This just moves the problem, it does not get rid of it. You'd still have to draw a line somewhere or you'd be just as lambasted - if not more so - by the ravenous hordes of Twitter etc: "odessacubbage.video hides nazis / commies / porn / jihadis / furries / whathavenots behind a smokescreen, get him!". They'll be calling your advertisers, scream murder at your registrar, boycott your hosting company, petition the government to do an inquiry and do all those other things the hordes do to quiet a dissenting voice. Those Twitter hordes did not exist in the days of video stores...

odessacubbage 8y ago

maybe a good compromise would be to base frontpage content on regional broadcast standards as that seems to be a pretty reliable measure for what is considered acceptable and then simply relegate the other content within it's own 'after dark' category, available to registered users. this is essentially how we handled things back in the era of video stores and it still seems applicable imo; keep the content, just bring back the curtain.

Yetanfou 8y ago
This just moves the problem, it does not get rid of it. You'd still have to draw a line somewhere or you'd be just as lambasted - if not more so - by the ravenous hordes of Twitter etc: "odessacubbage.video hides nazis / commies / porn / jihadis / furries / whathavenots behind a smokescreen, get him!". They'll be calling your advertisers, scream murder at your registrar, boycott your hosting company, petition the government to do an inquiry and do all those other things the hordes do to quiet a dissenting voice. Those Twitter hordes did not exist in the days of video stores...