just gonna paste their "find out why?" bit in here lol. my fave part might be the claim that censorship is only censorship when applied to pre-existing information, so since these people can't access the site in the first place, they're not being censored :very-smart:
Isn't blocking entire nations 'racism' or 'xenophobic'?
No. The nations blocked contain individuals of all races. Nations are not races. We block hostile nations because it is the most effective way to stop the abuse coming from their IP space online. “Racism” has absolutely nothing to do with IP addresses or preserving a quality community within CounterSocial. Additionally, any nationals from any of the blocked countries are welcome to participate on the network so long as they are not currently inside a blocked nations borders.
Now seems like a good time to mention that CounterSocial has built in direct one-click translation into over 80 languages.
Surely that's 'nationalistic'?
No. Currently, at the time of writing there are 195 nations on planet earth. We block 7 of them. 'Nationalistic' is defined as "having strong patriotic feelings, especially a belief in ones own countrys superiority." Again, we block 7 of 195 countries. So ask yourself: which country of the remaining 188 countries free to access the site is CounterSocial 'nationalistic' about?
Well then it MUST be 'censorship'? Right???
No. Censorship is defined as the act of redacting or altering ‘unacceptable’ parts of an existing communication. Therefore, “censoring” can only occur to content that has already been written and submitted to our platform. Bad actors are prohibited from creating content on CounterSocial in the first place, therefore blocking hostile nations is not “censorship.
What about my 'free speech'?
Freedom of Speech is a First Amendment right defined in the UNITED STATES Constitution. It guarantees that the U.S. Federal Government cannot infringe on an individual’s right to say whatever they’d like. CounterSocial is not the federal government, therefore it is impossible, by definition, for CounterSocial to be in violation of an individual's 1st Amendment rights to ‘free speech’. Sidenote: the UNITED STATES Constitution is relevant in the United States and to United States citizens, where our servers are based. US 'free speech' law is inapplicable elsewhere.
ok important update: it's run by a troop called The Jester (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jester_(hacktivist)), who previously had a plan to hack the fire alarms at the Ecuadorian embassy so Assange would have to leave & be in "ello ello ello, what do we have here then?" range of the police
okay i hate calling everything feds, but these are actual feds. you can tell because they're fucking stupid.
Revolution might not be as difficult as we thought
Also while some people support Assange and others dislike him, nobody with meaningful values feels that strongly about catching him. Only feds and bottomfeeder fed sympathizers do that. Literally no one else.
Anyone trying to get Assange is a psychopath and a danger to all journalists, everywhere.
This site is vastly more dangerous than musk is.
yeah, I figure any actual credible journalist using that site will get mysteriously doxxed pretty quick. maybe even a lil visit from the various 3/4 letter agencies too