Could you explain exactly why this policy was chosen?
I'm just speaking for myself, but at the end of the day it is a legal liability thing for the contributors and maintainers of the site in case anything crazy happens. We don't want to be like Reddit where we arbitrarily ban people for saying "eat the rich," but there is a line where threats of violence become illegal and can lead to this whole thing getting shut down.
We have broken the shackles of Reddit, but we have not yet broken the shackles of the Great Satan. We are still working out the nuance, but until we find a legally sound place to draw the line, we may err on the side of caution.
yes but you have to defend them in court where sarcasm really doesn't play well so don't say anything you don't mind getting read back to you by a prosecutor trying to nail you to the wall, to a jury who will definitely be selected for their inability to laugh at a joke.
But I mean if there are no laws on sarcasm technically it would be legal for me to say "I really hope Jeff Bezos doesn't get executed after a Communist revolution" wink
legality isn't the issue here - enforcement is. it's inevitable that the cops will try to fuck with us, whatever the law/court says. "it's technically legal" is lib shit.
Jeff Bezos, mind bathing in spices to make our job easier later? :alien:
he's doing his best thom yorke in No Surprises impression https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5CVsCnxyXg
Hello Jeff, this is Harriet. I have a new delivery method I would like to pitch to you. Please get back to me at your nearest convenience so I can show you an effective way to meet your diversity quota and projected daily earnings
Ngl, I reflexively downvoted this at first, but more people need to see this
