• mako@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Banning violent video games is government censorship and is a 1st amendment issue.

    Banning certain behaviors on their own platform is entirely the perogative of the platform owners.

    The two are not alike whatsoever.

    Your argument is akin to saying that not allowing strangers to fill your home and smoke crack is “censorship” and is “just so dumb.”

    Disagreeing with the rule or the underlying reasoning is anyone’s right, but disagreeing with a private owner’s right to decide who and what is allowed on their property is insincere at best as you would never agree to your own rights being infringed.

    • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      You’re confused, you muddled your taking points - the 1st amendment applies to the us governments but the word censorship has no relation to that

      Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or “inconvenient”.[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions,[6] and other controlling bodies.

      So no I’m not talking about the first ammendment at all I’m talking about whiney babies crying that twitch doesn’t censor things they don’t like and if the topic is twitch banning content then I’m entirely accurate in doing so

      Please try to focus and think through what you’re saying in future

      • mako@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        You made it a 1st amendment topic by comparing private platform censorship to banning violent video games, which would be a government action that eventually gets a lawsuit seen before the supreme court.

        I’m not trying to convince you of anything. I make it a point not argue with people who resort to name calling and shaming others - these people aren’t here to debate facts or allow their opinions to be changed.

        I’m providing a counterpoint to your erroneous logic for other people to see and choose for themselves.

        • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m very clearly talking about banning them on twitch, you really need to follow along. I never mentioned governments once.

          You think it’s OK for twitch to show gta6 to children as long as they don’t go in the strip club? A lot of people would argue that murder, drug dealing, theft, and all the other crime and immorality is actually worse. You might end up with a platform that only allows Nintendo’s most family-friendly shit.

          • mako@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            I think it’s ok for the owners of a privately owned platform to make decisions for that platform. If they want to exclusively show nudity, GTA6, or drying paint, I’m all for their autonomy.

            Your autonomy allows you to utilize their platform or not based on their choices. If the absence of a focus on the groin, butt, and breasts on a green screen offends your values, I would suggest not visiting Twitch.

            To bring it back your original comment, enjoying a platform’s decision to desexualize content while also being opposed to a government ban on violent video games is perfectly reasonable. The two scenarios are entirely different in scope and and context.

            • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              So you’ve totally changed your tone, why would you have commented what you did instead of saying ‘valid opion, I’m sure they’ll choose to do whatever they want based on public sentiment so you expressing your opion is a totally normal and acceptable thing to do’?

              You seem to want only people who agree with you to express their opinion, I’m not shocked of course that’s how censorship lovers slways think.

                • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  The first paragraph of this is brilliant projection.

                  You’ve also made up a lot of weird lies and confusion simply to get around the fact that your assertion that only governments can do censorship is wrong and all this to defend a totally meaningless point because my argument is still 100% as valid if we use a more cumbersome word or phrase instead of censorship.

                  Seriously read your own comment history and work on your issues.

                  Oh and anyone interested in how deceptive he’s being in this rant, his statement about me being into conspiracies is from a post talking about knowledge fight and the absurdity of conspiracy theories. This is not someone that even understands the concept of arguing in good faith.