Freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the UDHR states that “everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference” and “everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice”.
Also, “not my president” etc etc
I don’t think freedom of speech arguments are particularly relevant here.
1 Like
Freedom of speech does mean freedom from government backed consequences.
It does not mean any other freedom from consequences.
You can’t apply a global blanket statement and then say the stuff happening in your own country is “not my president”. I mean, it doesn’t work that way, either the blanket statement applies or it doesn’t.
Besides, like Chesskid mentioned, you’re free to say whatever you want… Just like people are free to kick you off of their property for exercising your freedom of speech.
If I want, I can blow an air-horn every time you curse in my presence. That is freedom of speech, it doesn’t say anything about the other person accepting what you have to say.
Back on topic:
The implementation I have in mind now is to have a site setting that autoreplaces. If you choose to have it off and keep using lynch you’ll be asked to turn it on.
1 Like
If you blew an air horn eveey time I swore, you’d run out of air horn before the day is up.
1 Like
So what is the point of having the option then?
Not totally sure but I think having the choice makes a difference to some people and I don’t think its particularly hard to add a setting.
If god herself said something was a right, I would have the right to question her, as no one is above questioning or ridicule.
I think there’s no point to adding a choice if (and I’m stealing from you) it’s only the illusion of choiche.
Well, basically you have the choice of people telling you to get your shit together, which was the other option.
1 Like
I mean as long as we have the choice to not turn it on even if we are told to have it on.
Otherwise it’s just banning the word
If people can’t be trusted to behave responsibly when given the choice, then there is always the potential that people will be forced to comply. So I would take the compromise and see if it works, and if it doesn’t and the word is repeatedly used by some people, then you might consider forcing change.
If I gave you free choice to either eat bananas or eat hamburgers, but everytime you ate a hamburger I told you that there were also bananas, but not vice versa, then it’s not really a free choice, now is it? You are being punished ever so slightly with each ham you eat.
It’s more abstract than that
The fact it is a right is up for debate yes, but it being a right is not because someone enforces it
It is either a right or not a right naturally, which is debatable, but a government recognising that does not change the fundamental truth of whether it is
If you keep using the word and have the setting off and refuse to turn it on when asked and then continue to keep using the word you’d probably be asked to leave the site.
The choice of autoreplace should be up to the user to decide. Do they wish to give into censorship to make themselves happier, or do they choose to see what people really say but in turn be less happy? Making that choice for us takes away liberty.
What does it matter if you have the setting on or off? If you didn’t want to see the word, you wod have the setting on. What are you even arguing here?
Different people aren’t seeing different things, it effects the mapping of the word you type in your composer to the actual post, everyone sees the same actual post.