4 ms·
The hotel can't keep the guys belongings in that case. When your business transaction is fleeting, you can handle exceptions easily. You can just stop selling
by vorpalhex 5y ago
The hotel can't keep the guys belongings in that case.
When your business transaction is fleeting, you can handle exceptions easily. You can just stop selling coffee to the guy who refuses to pay or makes rude comments.
On the other hand, you can't kick out a tenant because they are rude or even if they shit on the floor. You have to go through a process that has external, third party controls. The tenant is allowed to retrieve their property. You can't prevent the tenant from being rented to again.
Google, Facebook and co are basically digital landlords. The tenants get rights too.
- uniqueid 5y agoI do agree these companies have an obligation to provide a user with the data he or she creates. We might disagree over how far that goes. Personally I think they just owe the user a zip archive. My hotel analogy probably complicated things. The main problem I have with moderation on social media is that I think moderation is necessary (to keep the world relatively sane) but also impossible to implement objectively. So it's better to embrace the subjectivity than to obfuscate it with flowcharts and procedures.
- vorpalhex 5y agoYeah I agree that I don't think any platform is going to be objective, and I think a lot of users also don't want strictly objective moderators. One of the reasons I want the fediverse to do well is because it can solve this case. Your local instance can be moderated as you desire - heavy handedly or barely at all - and you can still communicate with other folks. However, we do need some kind of user rights to enable platform migrating. Something like mobile phone carriers where they have to unlock your phone and let you port your number. Social media companies need to let your identity and data be portable.