Nah

I thought it said hug 😔

I just don’t care 🙌

I seriously couldn’t give two fucks about supporting influencers or tech companies. Uploaders can pay for the infrastructure for all I care. Like people use to host websites out of passion, now everything is about profits, and politics, why would I want to support that? Why should I give two fucks about making someone else rich?

Fuck that shit. You can get cracked copies of the YouTube App that give a much better experience.

Do you not get cravings for food?

Eating is enjoyable, and to eat different foods is a different experience. Different smells, tastes, textures. Some people enjoy the experience of eating meat, they enjoy the taste, the texture. When they quit eating meat for ethical issues they still remember that they enjoyed meat.

So if you enjoy eating meat and only stopped due to the ethical issues, why wouldn’t you create a substitute?

It’s like a lesbian! Just because you aren’t attracted to a man, or don’t want to be with one, doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy a dildo.

Can this power be taught?

God I hope you’re 13 if you’re throwing ‘boomer’ around 😂

Keto jacked my libido thank you very much! I could probably murder an elk with my dick.

Hard to grasp as in, you’re against animal cruelty, but still, you’d like to eat products that resemble meat.

This seems pretty simple to me, plant based alternatives looking like meat doesn’t make them equitable to animal cruelty.

If you’re completely exhausted after your day it’s possible something deeper is going on

There’s different degrees of harm. We all live in society, that means our choices impact other people. The electronics powering the infrastructure we’re using are full of cobalt picked by child hands. You can’t eat almonds without contributing to death.

There’s a significant difference between punching someone in the face vs posting a Facebook article. And in my opinion, trying to exert control over the expression of others is a much more deliberate and direct act.

Sorry, I’m going to try to be less argumentative 😅

Misinformation has a direct cost in lives and money. So it seems to me to be morally good to stop it.

I personally consider things like freedom of thought, freedom of choice, and freedom of expression to be pretty sacred, and to restrict those is a massive ethics issue.

Either way, no one is a citizen of Facebook or Meta. Those platforms can police their content in whatever lawful ways they desire, and if they want to police misinformation that’s no one’s business but their own.

The problem is we do have government putting pressure on tech companies to implement these polices. Zuckerberg has been infront of Congress multiple times. To me that’s just a loop hole.

And why can’t I have an opinion on how Meta polices their information?

People can still consume any information they like. But expecting and requiring Facebook or Meta to be that place seems pretty silly to me.

In this instance though Meta is downgrading their department.

okay, okay, okay, okay… So hear this… We don’t even hold our elected officials accountable for what they say, but we’re pushing restrictions on what citizens can talk about?

Fuck that shit.

People are pissed about Trump, and anti-vax, and whatever else, and are scared of the effect of misinformation, but have you notice our demographics haven’t actually changed? Neither Republicans nor Democrats really have a hand up in elections.

So why are we restricting people’s freedoms of what information they consume?

Duuude… That’s all completely irrelevant to beehaw being authoritarian. Beehaw being privately operated isn’t a defence from criticism. Not at all. You refuse to accept that, you want to keep relying on a subjective perspective for whatever reason, have at it, you being wrong isn’t my problem. I’m done trying to help you understand.

And the second one is “I want to be able to talk about how gay people are grooming kids on this website that very explicitly bills itself as a safe space for LGBT persons and other minority groups”

Wait what lmao?! I 100% never said anything about “gay people grooming kids on this website” I dated a crazy controlling person that wanted their daughter to be queer. How you morphed that into the above is… Special. It’s interesting how you let bias manipulate everything you say. Even when trying to tell me about my own posts 😂

I personally think that story is a great litmus test by the way 😆 Not that you’ll give me credit!

And yeah… The fact that I’m RIGHT THERE asking how to remove beehaw from my feed shows how full of shit your claims are about me wanting to force myself on beehaw. So much for subtext!

This has been fun for me! Thank you for teaching me a bit about collectivist perspectives.

Being an ancap doesn’t count. That’s not a real ideology.

🥱

There’s text and then there’s subtext. You want access to a private space that can serve as a platform for you to voice your opinions

Dude where did I even say I want access to beehaw? You are completely full of shit. Subtext in this instance is just you making things up.

It’s not bullshit, though, because that’s the underlying premise of an authoritarian regime

In your mind yes, we’ve established your narrow view. In reality, no.

You don’t have some inalienable right to access EVERY single space that exists in the physical or virtual world.

Dude, drop the damn strawman arguments. I can judge beehaw without demanding access to it, which is exactly what I’ve done.

Stormfront is a famous one. Places like this are ran by people who hold beliefs that I find absolutely despicable, and I’m sure they would actively ban anyone who was LGBT, leftist, anti-racist, etc.,

And you wouldn’t see this as authoritatianism? Like you are so dense you’re unable to see distinction between communities?

In other words, banning someone from a hospital or from employment on the basis of their identity is a material detriment to the collective public good.

… I’m not a collectivist.

So just to be clear, you don’t believe in civil rights on an individual level? You see civil rights as contingent on government funding, and social norms? I see civil rights an an extension of personal autonomy.

So what about pre-civil war when legally blacks weren’t seen as people by law or social norms?

What happens when say… Abortions are determined to be against the collective good by a population? Body rights just stop being a thing?

Anyways I specifically talking about hypotheticals. Government funding and social norms aren’t relevant to whether you’d personally be okay with McDonald’s discriminating against gays, and whether you could understand that to be authoritarian. To make this easier we can pretend it’s a small business under 15 employees with no government funding.

Dude you project a LOT of convulted shit.

In other words, you want the authority to force others to cater to your desires and to run the website in a way that benefits you, at the cost of what others may want.

I’m a fucking anarchist 😂 Please quote me exactly where I said I want authority to force others to cater to my desires. The exact sentence.

Also just a heads up, when you start spewing a bunch of bullshit like “it’s not authoritianism because you have no valid claim to rights.” I don’t see the point in arguing. If fudging details makes you feel happy, that’s your choice.

And your xkcd comic was shit. I’ve seen it, and it makes me fucking sad Randall Munroe could produce such ignorant drivel. Freedom of speech exists beyond it’s legal representations. Like holy fuck, that is a BAD argument.

For fun, want to go into some of the implications of what you’re saying? For example, in a hypothetical would you be okay with beehaw refusing to serve gay members? You’d be okay with that?

And McDonald’s could do the same eh? Or XYX cake company. Or a fucking private hospital. Where’s your line? Do you have one?

It’s not authoritarianism if your participation is voluntary, bud.

I’m voluntarily having this conversation, but that doesn’t make you any less authoritarian.

Being well within your right to do something doesn’t make it not authoritatian.

If you invited me over for a party, and then kicked me out for a political opinion, yes that’s authoritianism.

That doesn’t fit here because your own initial argument isn’t really even an argument.

Sure it does, your inability, or unwillingness to understand isn’t really my problem. Beehaw is a politically authoritian echochamber. And I’m not talking about “slurs” as you ignorantly believe, you are not allowed to have politically contrary opinions, that’s how the friggen echochamber is maintained.

Anything else you’d like to say?

A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person’s argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way, and then attacks the extreme distortion, as if that is really the claim the first person is making.

Everything in life is a matter of degrees my man. It’s odd you don’t see this, you seem smart enough.

By your logic

Not by my logic, that’s how it is, admins govern over communities.

I can understand why my perspective upsets you, you’re controlling my dude.

Dude you’re aware admins/mods are governing bodies right? Authoritarianism applies. If you don’t like how I use the word, tough.