3 ms·
Now let's proceed to people who are _actually_ causing harm, such as, for example, anti-vaxxers, antifa, etc. Alex Jones, chemtrails, give me a break. He doesn'
by m0zg 8y ago
Now let's proceed to people who are _actually_ causing harm, such as, for example, anti-vaxxers, antifa, etc. Alex Jones, chemtrails, give me a break. He doesn't even believe in that shit himself. :-)
In fact, let's also ban CNN from there. It has been peddling fake conspiracy theories and divided the country for the past 2 years pretty much non-stop. That's kinda harmful innit?
- bilbo0s 8y agoSo they should ban all the people you want banned, because, you've got a better handle on what's "dangerous"?
- m0zg 8y agoIsn't that what they're doing already? How is Alex Jones "dangerous"? He's a joke, he doesn't even take himself seriously. If the stated goal is to minimize harm, then CNN has caused far more harm to the American people than Alex Jones ever will.
- bilbo0s 8y agoSo it is that you have a better handle on who is "dangerous" and who is not than FB does. Why do you feel your analysis is any more valid than FB's? Just as a matter of full disclosure, my position is, FB's private property, FB's rules. Just like my house, or yours I suspect, if you don't like the rules you have to leave. So that's my position on this whole thing. I'm just wondering why you think we should trust your word over FB's?
- m0zg 8y agoThere was no "analysis" there, it's purely a political move, don't get confused.