Everyone on a subconscious level, even the SocJus retards, know about how bad it's getting with self-censorship online. Everyone does it. And nearly everyone groans at it. A perfect non-politically motivated example is pretty much any video format refusing to allow people to talk about suicide and having to call it stupid things like "unaliving" or childish homonyms like "sewer slide" to get around the censors. And despite everyone hating the ridiculous censorship, the vast majority out there simply accept it. They use the stupid accepted newspeak like "unaliving" or "sewer slide".
So yeah, people are getting fed up with content moderation. The fact this is something that is even on the table for adults is ridiculous. That another person can have any sort of right to dictate what you can and cannot see. And what's worse are the absolute fucking retards that come along and say "muh private company", as if that's any moral argument at all. We don't allow private individuals to infringe on any other right, so why is infringing upon speech so routinely defended? Because that's the status quo.
Everyone on a subconscious level, even the SocJus retards, know about how bad it's getting with self-censorship online. Everyone does it. And nearly everyone groans at it. A perfect non-politically motivated example is pretty much any video format refusing to allow people to talk about suicide and having to call it stupid things like "unaliving" or childish homonyms like "sewer slide" to get around the censors. And despite everyone hating the ridiculous censorship, the vast majority out there simply accept it. They use the stupid accepted newspeak like "unaliving" or "sewer slide".
So yeah, people are getting fed up with content moderation. The fact this is something that is even on the table for adults is ridiculous. That another person can have any sort of right to dictate what you can and cannot see. And what's worse are the absolute fucking retards that come along and say "muh private company", as if that's any moral argument at all. We don't allow private individuals to infringe on any other right, so why is infringing upon speech so routinely defended? Because that's the status quo.