Anita Sarkeesian's New Internet Censorship Proposal

[Kimon²]

bait accepted, anita

[Ad Bot]

[Qwepir]

those "structural band aids" are the WORST loving ideas i've ever seen, with the exception of the first two
and even then, there already are "sharable block lists", it's called saying "i have blocked these people"

[Kimon²]

so basically people that dont have enough followers/subscribers or new users aren't allowed to share their opinion with "the more important e-celebs :^)"

[Nal]

LOL

[PowerDag]

those "structural band aids" are the WORST loving ideas i've ever seen, with the exception of the first two
and even then, there already are "sharable block lists", it's called saying "i have blocked these people"

heck everything on the "structural band-aids" list you can do simply by manual blocking of whoever is harassing you
are people that lazy/insecure that they need a program to block everyone they may not like for them?

[McZealot]

I agree with the first and none of the others because nobody should have their address posted online (EDIT to clarify: not the harrassment point. i don't believe in laws to protect peoples feelings. just a banning of stalking and posting personal information)

seems like a corporate-ish take power away from less popular users

[Ipquarx]

That first point in the first slide is BS. Emotion over the internet is very difficult to convey correctly sometimes and people who use social media can't be expected to get it right 100% of the time. Until there's evidence that they have malicious intent to cause actual harm (Either direct or indirect) they should not be prosecuted.

Harassment online is also solved by blocking the harassers. 10000000000x easier and is not a gigantic waste of resources, jfc

[PowerDag]

Harassment online is also solved by blocking the harassers. 10000000000x easier and is not a gigantic waste of resources, jfc

apparently these people have never heard of blocking people manually

[Qwepir]

are people that lazy/insecure that they need a program to block everyone they may not like for them?

exactly
I know online harassment can be a problem and that in some cases, blocking douchebags is going to be necessary. But I would be willing to wager money on the suggestion that if these things were implemented, the vast majority of blockings would not be for actual legitimate harassment, and instead simple disagreements.

[Bacon Pancakes]

jesus what a bitch
theres something called ignoring
10x easier than forgetin bandaids

[PowerDag]

10x easier than forgetin bandaids

but she needs those bandaids for her digital booboos :'(

[Jairo]

oh no why is she using bebas

that was my favorite font god dammit

[Bacon Pancakes]

but she needs those bandaids for her digital booboos :'(

lets hope that booboo gets infected

[sir dooble]

Is the first slide not redundant when you acknowledge that America isn't the only country on the internet?

Are civil rights laws in the US really going to help you if you've got Brits, or Aussies or the French or Germans, or Japanese or Argentinians 'harrassing' you?
Is the US really going to call for extradition of foreign nationals just to accuse them of upsetting Americans online?

[Ipquarx]

"Plaintiffs should be able to sue harassers under pseudonyms to protect their identities"

Most pointless thing ever. Unless you're going to sue them on live television, there's noone to protect your "identities" (might i take a moment to say, wtf? You are one person. Not several.) from.

Who, the judge? Judges don't give away that kind of information to people. The defendant? The defendant is going to instantly know who sued them, pointless. The jury? Pointless again, they're just random people. Plus, I'm pretty sure that somewhere along the line you need to sign your actual name for legal documents.