6 ms·

I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly, but Something Awfully famously censored certain types of porn-related posts leading to 4chan so unfettered free s

I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly, but Something Awfully famously censored certain types of porn-related posts leading to 4chan so unfettered free speech isn't something SA has ever really been known for.

newbie789 5y ago
Having rules on a private website is against the concept of free speech? How much of your own money are you willing to spend on hosting and serving an unlimited amount of user-uploaded hentai tentacle porn on your privately-owned domain? If the answer is anything less than “infinite money”, you’re anti-free-speech.
- tylersmith 5y ago
  Having rules against certain content means you are not a platform for "unfettered free speech". That's not some sort of moralistic slur it's just a fact that runs contrary to the post I was responding to. It's not "against the concept of free speech" to run a platform with censorship/moderation, it just means your platform isn't a place to practice it.
  - newbie789 5y ago
    The phrase “unfettered free speech” only appears in the comments here and not in the article. I can also make up stuff he could have said but didn’t. As far as I know, he didn’t advocate for changing the name of Myanmar back to Burma, so that’s an indicator that he supported military-run governments? That being said, if you’re not willing to host me and my friends’ tentacle porn libraries, you’re not an advocate for free speech at all, so what are we actually talking about here?
    - tylersmith 5y ago
      > The phrase “unfettered free speech” only appears in the comments here and not in the article. Yes, and I responded to that comment and not the article.
      - newbie789 5y ago
        Oh okay. Here, I’m going to say “Lowtax was a huge fan of K-Pop”. Since now that’s been posted, you can accept it as fact and argue that you went through his post history and give me your thoughts.
        Dylan16807 5y ago
        ??? The analogous response would be "no he wasn't, what are you talking about". You're going after the wrong person here.
        newbie789 5y ago
        What exactly are you trying to have a discussion with me about? Edit: it’s wrong of me for uh, responding?
        Dylan16807 5y ago
        You're harassing someone for basically saying "your mention of 'unfettered free speech' is off topic". While acting like the person that said that is the one that brought up 'unfettered free speech'. You are wrong to do that.
        newbie789 5y ago
        I made an equally arbitrary comment to the one you responded to. To save time, Why are you responding to my posts? Do you have any personal opinions about Rich Kyanka? If so, do you care to share? If not, am I expected to debate your position? If so, (again because I don’t know why you’re responding) what exactly is your opinion on this topic aside from… not liking what I said?
        newbie789 5y ago
        What Are You Talking About
        5y ago
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      > I can also make up stuff he could have said but didn’t. I think you're getting confused. pstuart was the one mentioning unfettered free speech, and tylersmith was the one saying it's not relevant to the article/SA.
  - newbie789 5y ago
    I’m still waiting on your publicly accessible upload portal for tentacle porn. At this point, your reticence to give me access to your personal website’s storage has crossed from censorious to violating the non-agression policy. It’s quite telling that you’re aggressively anti-free speech.
- unclebucknasty 5y ago
  >If the answer is anything less than “infinite money”, you’re anti-free-speech. Pointing this out is not the most popular thing on HN, but that doesn't make it less true. I made a similar case a week or two ago in response to someone who did a Show HN on their new "free speech" platform. I essentially challenged the creator to advocate for his new platform by supporting the speech rights of child abusers to promote their ideas, as testament to his committment to "free speech". Told him no one should believe his committment to free speech if he wasn't willing to advocate for those most universally loathed by society. Guess what I got? Downvotes. But, that's the heart of it. At the end of the day, these people like the idea of "free speech" and they dislike the idea of speech they approve not being given the broadest possible platform. But, when it hits the fan, it's actually the latter that they're addressing with their platforms and pronouncements.
  - newbie789 5y ago
    > I essentially challenged the creator to advocate for his new platform by supporting the speech rights of child abusers to promote their ideas I wouldn’t do that. I’m not sure why anybody would.
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      Well, feel free to substitute something legal or more abstract, like tentacle porn. But, I did it exactly because it's a real-world example of near-universally abhorrent speech that I don't think they would support on their own platform. But, the deplatformed and other types who are recently lamenting "the great fall of free speech" always offer the argument "who gets to decide what speech is acceptable?", which is a gratingly disingenuous position that pretends we don't have standards and laws, etc. as a society. And further pretends that they themselves believe there should be no limitations on free speech ("unfettered"). We've always had deciders. These people just don't like the recent decisions. But, if that's not the case, then the only way to prove it is to truly allow all speech on their own platform and telegraph that intention by openly supporting the speech rights of the most abhorrent people in society.
      - 5y ago
- Talanes 5y ago
  Wait are you part of this conversation?
astrange 5y ago
> Something Awfully famously censored certain types of porn-related posts leading to 4chan According to people who weren't there at the time, yes. (That mostly happened several years later on SA.)
- icehawk 5y ago
  No that basically all happend around the same time. If you look at the SAclopedia entries for ADTRW, they're all from early 2004 and you see things like "The fact that Lowtax hates makes it the forum whipping-boy."
  - astrange 5y ago
    Those were written by random goons which aren't any better of a source. It didn't seriously affect ADTRW until the Helldump era - one of Lowtax's worst ideas where he just turned the forums into a circular firing squad, then after people made him delete it, whined about it for the rest of his life.

newbie789 5y ago

Having rules on a private website is against the concept of free speech? How much of your own money are you willing to spend on hosting and serving an unlimited amount of user-uploaded hentai tentacle porn on your privately-owned domain? If the answer is anything less than “infinite money”, you’re anti-free-speech.

tylersmith 5y ago
Having rules against certain content means you are not a platform for "unfettered free speech". That's not some sort of moralistic slur it's just a fact that runs contrary to the post I was responding to. It's not "against the concept of free speech" to run a platform with censorship/moderation, it just means your platform isn't a place to practice it.
- newbie789 5y ago
  The phrase “unfettered free speech” only appears in the comments here and not in the article. I can also make up stuff he could have said but didn’t. As far as I know, he didn’t advocate for changing the name of Myanmar back to Burma, so that’s an indicator that he supported military-run governments? That being said, if you’re not willing to host me and my friends’ tentacle porn libraries, you’re not an advocate for free speech at all, so what are we actually talking about here?
  - tylersmith 5y ago
    > The phrase “unfettered free speech” only appears in the comments here and not in the article. Yes, and I responded to that comment and not the article.
    - newbie789 5y ago
      Oh okay. Here, I’m going to say “Lowtax was a huge fan of K-Pop”. Since now that’s been posted, you can accept it as fact and argue that you went through his post history and give me your thoughts.
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        ??? The analogous response would be "no he wasn't, what are you talking about". You're going after the wrong person here.
        newbie789 5y ago
        What exactly are you trying to have a discussion with me about? Edit: it’s wrong of me for uh, responding?
        Dylan16807 5y ago
        You're harassing someone for basically saying "your mention of 'unfettered free speech' is off topic". While acting like the person that said that is the one that brought up 'unfettered free speech'. You are wrong to do that.
        newbie789 5y ago
        I made an equally arbitrary comment to the one you responded to. To save time, Why are you responding to my posts? Do you have any personal opinions about Rich Kyanka? If so, do you care to share? If not, am I expected to debate your position? If so, (again because I don’t know why you’re responding) what exactly is your opinion on this topic aside from… not liking what I said?
        newbie789 5y ago
        What Are You Talking About
        5y ago
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    > I can also make up stuff he could have said but didn’t. I think you're getting confused. pstuart was the one mentioning unfettered free speech, and tylersmith was the one saying it's not relevant to the article/SA.
- newbie789 5y ago
  I’m still waiting on your publicly accessible upload portal for tentacle porn. At this point, your reticence to give me access to your personal website’s storage has crossed from censorious to violating the non-agression policy. It’s quite telling that you’re aggressively anti-free speech.
unclebucknasty 5y ago
>If the answer is anything less than “infinite money”, you’re anti-free-speech. Pointing this out is not the most popular thing on HN, but that doesn't make it less true. I made a similar case a week or two ago in response to someone who did a Show HN on their new "free speech" platform. I essentially challenged the creator to advocate for his new platform by supporting the speech rights of child abusers to promote their ideas, as testament to his committment to "free speech". Told him no one should believe his committment to free speech if he wasn't willing to advocate for those most universally loathed by society. Guess what I got? Downvotes. But, that's the heart of it. At the end of the day, these people like the idea of "free speech" and they dislike the idea of speech they approve not being given the broadest possible platform. But, when it hits the fan, it's actually the latter that they're addressing with their platforms and pronouncements.
- newbie789 5y ago
  > I essentially challenged the creator to advocate for his new platform by supporting the speech rights of child abusers to promote their ideas I wouldn’t do that. I’m not sure why anybody would.
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    Well, feel free to substitute something legal or more abstract, like tentacle porn. But, I did it exactly because it's a real-world example of near-universally abhorrent speech that I don't think they would support on their own platform. But, the deplatformed and other types who are recently lamenting "the great fall of free speech" always offer the argument "who gets to decide what speech is acceptable?", which is a gratingly disingenuous position that pretends we don't have standards and laws, etc. as a society. And further pretends that they themselves believe there should be no limitations on free speech ("unfettered"). We've always had deciders. These people just don't like the recent decisions. But, if that's not the case, then the only way to prove it is to truly allow all speech on their own platform and telegraph that intention by openly supporting the speech rights of the most abhorrent people in society.
    - 5y ago
Talanes 5y ago
Wait are you part of this conversation?

astrange 5y ago

> Something Awfully famously censored certain types of porn-related posts leading to 4chan According to people who weren't there at the time, yes. (That mostly happened several years later on SA.)

icehawk 5y ago
No that basically all happend around the same time. If you look at the SAclopedia entries for ADTRW, they're all from early 2004 and you see things like "The fact that Lowtax hates makes it the forum whipping-boy."
- astrange 5y ago
  Those were written by random goons which aren't any better of a source. It didn't seriously affect ADTRW until the Helldump era - one of Lowtax's worst ideas where he just turned the forums into a circular firing squad, then after people made him delete it, whined about it for the rest of his life.