Because the government has to pay her legal fees perhaps.

I never thought I would find myself living in Dickensian England.

That’s how far democracy has gone down the drain, that even criticising cancel culture is ‘brave’.

Careful with that pitchfork, Eugene. Free speech is a civil liberty, not right wing.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/civil-liberty

Take it to a witch-burning.

Perhaps he can get a job at the Daily Mail.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12636545/cartoonist-steve-bell-refuses-apologist-anti-Semitic-Netanyahu-sketch.html

The Guardian was started by Unitarians who are supposed to be open to ideas, but now it fully embraces cancel culture and censorship, like any orthodoxy.

Let’s make farting in public a crime.

Cancel culture is fine as long as the majority is right. But gay people were once a victim of cancel culture.

This is old news.

But what browser should I use? Do I have to check the politics of every employee or volunteer?

People on Mastodon are complaining about people talking about twitter, and posting their complaints to the hashtag #twitter which is very odd, as they could filter it.

I expect there will be filters on Lemmy eventually.

I think there is a risk that Threads will be massive, and so people will think that the way to get on Mastodon is Threads, and eventually that Threads is Mastodon. C/f Google Groups and Usenet.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jp5a77/google-a-search-company-has-made-its-internet-archive-impossible-to-search

Even Churches use Facebook. It’s not going to be easy.

I remember it filling groups with non-text posts which could not be read by Usenet clients, among other things.

I’m not on Facebook but I know people who are, and they are just ordinary people who made a poor choice and didn’t read the terms and conditions. It’s all those people who you are excluding, not just Facebook employees.

I should think there are many people who think Google Groups is Usenet, and they have to register with google to post on there. Recently I think they have removed the option to view the source of an article.

Suspending them before they have actually done anything wrong is a bit like a pre-crime.

Remember what Google Groups did to Usenet? We should be wary.

I see this now on feddit.uk but permanently displaying the wrong name not just for a few seconds.

If it is software how do you know who has implemented it and whether the instance respects privacy?