You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Fighting spam, dealing with losers, and why no one gives a fuck
Well the question then is who is the one in charge of censorship? Isn't the idea to have a decentralized platform? If you are a fan of censorship then that is bringing in a "centralized" concept onto a de-centralized community platform. When you choose a censorship "authority" then they will be the ones controlling the content that is produced - which is against the idealism that the blockchain/decentralized network is all about is it not?
Why do you say that censorship is "centralized?" I'm sorry but that doesn't make sense. It is an activity that can be centralized or not; it is not inherently centralized.
Property owners are in charge of censorship of their respective property. If you own or have control over the page or property, then you have a right to censor it. Would you think it's 'bad' if you were forced to listen to every Jehovah's witness who rang your bell? Of course you would, because it's your home, the JW's are on your property, and you have the right to censor them.
Is your home 'centralized'? It's an irrelevant question, you are the property owner and you have the right to dictate the terms and conditions of the speech that goes on in your property, just like the owners of a fishing magazine can choose to allow knitting articles or not. That's how property ownership and censorship works.
Now, when the GOVERNMENT does it... that's a different story. We should have freedom FROM government limitations on our speech. The government has neither the right to force fishing magazines to include knitting articles, nor prevent them.