3 ms·

There is no "slope" when it comes to private establishments. Just like McDonalds reserves the right to not serve you if you aren't wearing shoes or a shirt, Tu

There is no "slope" when it comes to private establishments. Just like McDonalds reserves the right to not serve you if you aren't wearing shoes or a shirt, Tumblr reserves the right to limit whatever content they see fit. Freedom of speech does not apply when participating on a private organization's platform.

drivebyacct2 15y ago
Why does the term "slippery slope" only apply to public rights? Again, no one is making this a legal thing. No one here is saying that Tumblr is legally required to let me blog about my suicide. We're saying that it's concerning as a [potential] user to see a provider like this arbitrarily suppressing content.
- blantonl 15y ago
  First, who is "we?" And second, if it is a concern that Tumblr won't allow your content, why can't you develop (or find) your own platform? Just because these platforms have huge audiences doesn't mean they are appropriate for your individual message.
  - drivebyacct2 15y ago
    Sorry, I'm surely abusing the proverbial "we". I just feel that your attempting to discredit anyone who dissents as using "free speech" when this really (as you point out) isn't about free speech at all. For the record, I do use my own platform and don't really ever use Tumblr. The sorts of things I write about don't really attract the "repost"/"like" style of Tumblr and I don't think the audience would be relevant anyway. I can say that if I ever decided to start a photography blog or something where mass audiences and such were important, I would be much less likely to use Tumblr knowing that this is their policy. I guess I feel like your defending Tumblr from some sort of attack by me. Like I said, Tumblr is free to do whatever they want and their users can leave or stay. I just think this policy is a turn-off and I wouldn't be shocked if in 3 months we see "Tumblr bans tumbles(?) about drugs/rock-n-roll, etc" posts.

drivebyacct2 15y ago

Why does the term "slippery slope" only apply to public rights? Again, no one is making this a legal thing. No one here is saying that Tumblr is legally required to let me blog about my suicide. We're saying that it's concerning as a [potential] user to see a provider like this arbitrarily suppressing content.

blantonl 15y ago
First, who is "we?" And second, if it is a concern that Tumblr won't allow your content, why can't you develop (or find) your own platform? Just because these platforms have huge audiences doesn't mean they are appropriate for your individual message.
- drivebyacct2 15y ago
  Sorry, I'm surely abusing the proverbial "we". I just feel that your attempting to discredit anyone who dissents as using "free speech" when this really (as you point out) isn't about free speech at all. For the record, I do use my own platform and don't really ever use Tumblr. The sorts of things I write about don't really attract the "repost"/"like" style of Tumblr and I don't think the audience would be relevant anyway. I can say that if I ever decided to start a photography blog or something where mass audiences and such were important, I would be much less likely to use Tumblr knowing that this is their policy. I guess I feel like your defending Tumblr from some sort of attack by me. Like I said, Tumblr is free to do whatever they want and their users can leave or stay. I just think this policy is a turn-off and I wouldn't be shocked if in 3 months we see "Tumblr bans tumbles(?) about drugs/rock-n-roll, etc" posts.