I agree with you on this. Although the intent of social media and connecting with others technically isn't a crime, in the US, it can be viewed as such if the person you've connected to is accused of something terrible. Their connections on social media are all then also checked into.

I'm a stickler for legal language. I've been burned by it too many times. Despite how the terms are actually written, the interpretation of it will be whatever is necessary at the time to preserve the company's interests over the person. At least that is how it is in the US.

I read the terms with a fine tooth comb and quite honestly -- there is language in them that can be considered vague as well as, IMHO, full of holes. And not the pretty kind that give you a happy ending.

• Who is in charge of determining what is illegal?
• How is "hate speech" defined?

You're right on many counts of what you said.

Even though on the surface, it may appear if you're not doing anything illegal and your intentions are not to do anything illegal, then you shouldn't have anything to worry about. To me, that's the same argument I hear in the States about privacy, "If you don't have anything to hide, why do you care that you're being monitored?"

It comes down to basic human rights, freedoms, etc.

The second you're incorporating in America, you're subjected to all the laws corporations must abide by, regardless of the structure or type. This includes all of the little legal maneuvers you must execute as a company to save your company's ass if you want it to stay in business.

I see these TOS by Steemit and the way they are worded as doing exactly that.

I don't know how much longer I'll be on this platform. I don't like being subjected to vague and widely interpreted and undefined legal terminology. I get enough of that out of fucking family court. I don't need it out of a social media.