View Poll Results: Which form of censorship, if any, do you support?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • By private platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, &c.)

    18 69.23%
  • By the government

    0 0%
  • Both

    2 7.69%
  • Neither

    5 19.23%
  • Other (please indicate in a post)

    2 7.69%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
Thanks Tree65Thanks

Thread: Opinions on Censorship

  1. #21
    Senior Member NeoVsMatrix's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    8,813
    Thanks
    7893

    From
    NY
    Quote Originally Posted by DebateDrone View Post
    I voted both.

    I do not want to see snuff films or cartoons of child porn to be allowed distributed and viewed on any media.

    No censorship means every subject matter can be discussed or produced and viewed.
    hmm. i think there's a difference between discretionary censoring, and general prohibition of content like child pornography. Banning child pornography for obvious very good reasons, i wouldn't call censoring by any means.

  2. #22
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    57,905
    Thanks
    33512

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    I feel similar. When all we used to get was news/media it was fairly clear. They had a distinct job and people were aware of it and felt it was important. Now with the growth of FB and Twitter etc many people use them exclusively to get their news. So when there is any type of censorship, they are only getting part of the story. Its also terribly confusing when you see some of these congregate sites where a well known journalist publishes something and then syndicates it all over social media.
    Whut kind of nitwit gets all their news from Facebook or Twitter?

    That's inviting nonsense into your brain.
    Thanks from Blues63, Hollywood, One and 3 others

  3. #23
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    11,706
    Thanks
    7176

    From
    Between everywhere
    Quote Originally Posted by MaryAnne View Post
    The reason I voted both is because there are times Governments have to censor.

    War time when vital secrets can cost lives. When the Justice Department or FBI are doing investigations.

    To say nothing should ever be censored is not wise. The Media does it too.
    I sympathize. But then that means that there is someone, or even worse some committee that decides these things. And that can be a whole other can of ridiculousness. And can become scary. That's a real danger.
    Thanks from Madeline

  4. #24
    Veteran Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    3453

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    What the hell does that have to do with censoring speech?
    The argument is that companies should be allowed to discriminate over who they do business with, so, I am just trying to establish the limits.

    Should a restaurant be allowed to turn away service for someone who, as a youth, expressed an opinion the owner did not like?

    What if the person said "I'm gay", should a company be allowed to refuse service?

    So far we are pretty strong in the pro-censorship side... Let's just spell out how tyrannical we want society to be.

  5. #25
    DEEP STATE CEO Blues63's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    9,946
    Thanks
    7431

    From
    SPECTRE HQ
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    The argument is that companies should be allowed to discriminate over who they do business with...
    No, it isn't.
    Thanks from NightSwimmer, johnflesh and Madeline

  6. #26
    Veteran Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    22,269
    Thanks
    3453

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by Blues63 View Post
    No, it isn't.
    Thanks for the useless response. Are you capable of clarifying?

    You know your computer won't break if you make more than a 3 word response, right?

  7. #27
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    39,985
    Thanks
    38396

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    The argument is that companies should be allowed to discriminate over who they do business with, so, I am just trying to establish the limits.

    Should a restaurant be allowed to turn away service for someone who, as a youth, expressed an opinion the owner did not like?

    What if the person said "I'm gay", should a company be allowed to refuse service?

    So far we are pretty strong in the pro-censorship side... Let's just spell out how tyrannical we want society to be.

    Start your own thread if this is what you want to discuss, or open one of whathisname's old dick cake threads. There must be a thousand of them.

  8. #28
    DEEP STATE CEO Blues63's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    9,946
    Thanks
    7431

    From
    SPECTRE HQ
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    Thanks for the useless response.
    I responded to a useless comment. What the fuck do you want? The Iliad?

    Are you capable of clarifying?
    Yes, the subject is different to that in your claim.

    You know your computer won't break if you make more than a 3 word response, right?
    Yes, but getting into discussions with you is futile, as you do not comprehend my posts, therefore, it's best to keep responses terse and monosyllabic where possible, in order to avoid the usual eight pages of me parsing out my own posts for you, while you project, misrepresent, and lie through your teeth all the way through the exchange. That shit is boring.
    Last edited by Blues63; 8th August 2018 at 04:57 PM. Reason: typo and more info

  9. #29
    Shitposting Rank 4 Missle Command Champion johnflesh's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    21,745
    Thanks
    12049

    From
    Colorado
    I'm okay if a company can censor. Or even if a company can censor because of a personal bias. It's the want or need I don't agree with and I believe that is a very general take on it - shared by a lot of folks.

    Companies who censor will suffer because of it in some way, and that's on them.

    Facebook doing so has made them look bad or worse to some. Perhaps one person contemplated their stance and went elsewhere for their social medias.

    A game company censored feedback from an upcoming title and suffered a less than stellar launch and following, costing the company reputation and probably some cash.

    It happens, and while I don't agree with the need to censor - it's not really something you can just take away from them. Let's be realistic.
    Thanks from boontito and Ian Jeffrey

  10. #30
    Shut up and vote Addiction Solitaire Champion, Double Deuce Champion, Queen Jewels Champion, Ray Ray Shuffle Champion, Twins Champion, Blow Up: Arcade Champion, Bunch - Time Trial Champion, Znax Champion, Zoo Keeper Champion, Sobics School Champion, Swap a Smiley Champion, Makos Champion, Dino Drop Champion, Flower Frenzy Champion, Some Puzzle Champion, Funny Bubbles Champion, CubeZ Champion, Dinky Smash Champion, Fun Fun Animals Champion, Fruit Fabriek Champion, Raft Wars Champion, Rainbow Monkey RunDown Champion, Raft Wars Champion, Crime Puzzle Champion Blueneck's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    50,171
    Thanks
    28597

    From
    Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by johnflesh View Post
    I'm okay if a company can censor. Or even if a company can censor because of a personal bias. It's the want or need I don't agree with and I believe that is a very general take on it - shared by a lot of folks.

    Companies who censor will suffer because of it in some way, and that's on them.

    Facebook doing so has made them look bad or worse to some. Perhaps one person contemplated their stance and went elsewhere for their social medias.

    A game company censored feedback from an upcoming title and suffered a less than stellar launch and following, costing the company reputation and probably some cash.

    It happens, and while I don't agree with the need to censor - it's not really something you can just take away from them. Let's be realistic.
    Yeah, but let's not give the reins to Zuckerberg when the government decides to "regulate" the internet. That guy is a self-serving douche. I am convinced he's bent on world domination through passive aggression.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Opinions on Euthanasia?
    By Katiegrrl0 in forum Civil Rights
    Replies: 158
    Last Post: 16th December 2010, 09:52 AM
  2. Op Ed? Is this for opinions?
    By Ronster in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 1st April 2009, 08:56 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed