It's something that made Twitter pointless when I had an account there (under a pseudonym) and I am subject to the same problem on YouTube for most of my replies (again, under a pseudonym). I find shadowbanning to be a form of psychological coercive abuse.
If this is happening to people paying for X Premium, there could potentially be an argument to be made in court for obtaining money by deception. Might be class action lawsuit time with someone who has the money to test it in court.
Even at home, you're seeing the same shift toward long form content. For your average household, that's movies and it's why streaming movie viewing is so popular now, despite the hefty price hikes. Everyone I know watches sports and movies, not the thirty to hour long programmes. Even the broadcast channels are heading this way, albeit to shy of an hour long after breaks. The thirty minute programme is becoming a rare breed in prime time.
Even electrical repair content which is normally less than an hour long, the channels can see where things are going and you now have what would have been multiple videos or parts to a video now in one 2 hour video.
If he had made the defence that X is a walled garden and they want free, universal access, then their argument would have had some credibility (which is why Tucker also put his Putin interview on his website too). Instead he goes full Elon Derangement Syndrome.
Some of the most vitriolic stuff I have seen from what someone has said hasn't come from that person saying something hateful, it's from that person saying an uncomfortable truth. The challenging of someone's core belief as a lie, a myth, a confidence trick - that is what causes them offence.
The only reproductive rights men exclusively have is to refrain from sex. But that carries the stigma of having his masculinity questioned and besmirched. Everything else, including vasectomies in a number of locations, require the permission of a woman or is exclusively in the control of a woman.
A blacklist policy will never work. You play a never-ending game of whack-a-mole. What is being advocated now is a whitelist approach - banned by default unless explicitly allowed. It's why I bring up North Korea's Kwangmyong though the UK if it were to seriously go down this road would probably not go down that far. More likely a tiered hybrid Internet/Intranet system determined by status.
The one big problem for the Government will be Starlink. Will Elon comply with the Government's wishes or dissent even if it means the can't legally receive payment from UK citizens?
I suspect it would be a hybrid approach if they did follow through on this - Intranet only for the general public with companies being the middleman for any content that needs to be fetched from the Internet, all vetted and licensed by Ofcom. Private companies with Internet usage policies would have restricted Internet access for business. Only Government officials and the three letter agencies would have unregulated and full access to the Internet.
Their argument is more the case of 'we can't control the Internet so lets shut it down (for children - as a start, because it won't end with them) and build a new Intranet with a locked down OS and surveillance for both parents and the state'. If the UK was to do that, we'd join the likes of North Korea, Myanmar, Cuba and Iran in implementing a walled garden ecosystem - in this proposals case, for children - but we all know it won't end there.
And I suspect the BBC is pushing this heavily because that would be a whole swathe of competition gone for eyes, ear and challenges to their narrative.
He's right. Any sign of weakness is not deemed masculine and that in turn creates both a point you can be attacked against in the future and give her the "ick", an evolutionary trait to men violating masculine norms or demonstrating feminine traits. This is why men are stoic, don't open up to women and no amount of media pressure and shaming will change that. It's part of the human hardware and the human OS and software can't override the laws of nature and evolution.
They will respond by saying "criticism is not harassment, our policy does not cover criticism". Whether it's a gaming company, news comments section, politician and so on.
And yet every single time, it is criticism that gets censored and earns you a ban. Every single time.
Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.
Everyone I know seems to be into exercise and healthy eating, if anything, not doing those things are what makes you the black sheep.
There is also an acceptance of OnlyFans. Being against that (despite allowing people the freedom to do it) also makes you a black sheep.
It all has the feel of an op to pursue an agenda.
The ultimate goal for Government and corporations is to have a fully controlled intranet. Think North Korea's Kwangmyong. With everything tracked, identified and walled gardened.
That's a separate issue and the security certificate isn't being renewed because Zedeus can not see any practical solution to obtaining the data needed for Nitter and their instances to run without a massive crippling payment for API access.
Ultimately Elon has a scraper/lurker/bot issue where it appears that his solution to all of them will be to erect a walled garden. The solutions enacted and shortly forthcoming also affects registered users too, particularly after the mass scraping and Taylor Swift incidents last week plus pressure on Elon to adhere to online safety laws and advertiser's to verify their identities and deal with the bot/lurker problem.
Which is ironic because last week, he finally succeeded in killing off Nitter and any other way of browsing X anonymously. Going forward, you will need an account to view tweets on X. Elon's dream of a walled garden for X is approaching completion.
The thing is, it's also anti-ugly male and anti-fat male. The examples regarding beautiful-ugly and fit-fat only apply to women. And I would also add anti-neuroatypical male. There is no sympathy for the man who was born with a genetic disadvantage whether physical or mental to appear on fantasy romantic novels or be given a leg-up on dating apps. There is no fat acceptance movement for men, it's either get jacked or get lost. Even in political matters, we known in mainstream society MRA's and MGTOW get denigrated, mocked and treated as a threat whilst feminists and minorities have political influence and societal control.
This I feared would become the prominent financial model for gaming - an access fee and a subscription fee where both must be satisfied to allow you a licence to play the game.
It's also being slowly rolled out to other digital mediums and physical products too on the basis that inventors and creators should be continually paid for the "value" a product or service provides to an individual plus the control as to what happens to a product should exclusively be in the hands of the creator or inventor, not the consumer. Which means that the game developer can cut off access when they feel like it and implement planned obsolescence in order to get you to upgrade and pay more or merely because it doesn't make enough money any more.
I'll wager the next General Election will be on January 23rd, 2025. The last Thursday (elections are traditionally held on a Thursday in the UK) before they have to legally call an election. Sunak will delay it as long as possible to try and claw back the lead Labour has, call the election prior to Christmas and then run the campaign in January to the election.
Not that it'll make a difference because we have a uniparty situation where the only thing that changes is the colour of the rosette and the ribbon.
That doesn't work for me, I could write a completely innocuous post and it will still be shadowbanned. I haven't figured out what determines what gets shadowbanned but I have known comments with no banned terms and yet it won't shown up in a private tab.