6 ms·
> It's more the idea of an organization claiming they have the authority to forbid you from tweeting at members. Unless the members agreed to give them that au
by jasonlotito 4y ago
> It's more the idea of an organization claiming they have the authority to forbid you from tweeting at members.
Unless the members agreed to give them that authority.
Let me ask you this: are you a member of that community, or merely an outsider imposing your opinions on others that did not consent?
If the former, that's fine. If not, why do you feel it's fair to do to others what you think is wrong for them to do?
- FeepingCreature 4y agoWell, it doesn't say anything of the sort in the CPG, that I can see: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/participation/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/part... If this is truly happening with informed consent, I'll say that it's morally acceptable to me - but still creepy, to a similar degree as, say, Scientology. In that case my question becomes, "what possessed you to give them that sort of power?"