Do you defend a company’s right to use child and slave labor in 3rd world countries?
“Well they’re a private company so they can do what they want.”
Thats a nice bit of Whataboutism / Whataboutery.
We are not talking about child or slave labour. We are talking about Gab.
9 Likes
Thats a non-sequitur. Plenty of people boycott companies that use child labor and sweatshops.
3 Likes
But nothing comes of it. GoDaddy isn’t banning anyone for using child labor. Which is worse than any mean words.
So it’s not a whataboutism. (Nice buzzword to deflect the argument)
It’s a non-sequitur because GoDaddy can do business with whomever they please. In this case they’ve chosen not to do business with Gab, because they’re known to incite violence. If enough people boycotted GoDaddy because they do business with companies that use child labor, im sure they’d also be banned by GoDaddy.
But you’re just trying to sound like you have a valid point, when you dont.
6 Likes
You guys can deflect and make shit up all you want. At the end of the day it’s a blatant double standard and should not be allowed. I heard nothing but fucking doomsday freak outs and crying about net neutrality on here but you guys are seriously defending this.
Well AT&T and Verizon are technically private companies. So by your standards they can fuck you over all they want. “But wait, there’s no one else in my area to use! No fair!”
Well tough shit. Private companies are free to shaft you all they want now. Better bend over and take it. At least that’s what most of you sound like.
My bad. I hadn’t looked closely at your forum avatar before, I didn’t realize what kind of person I was talking to.
3 Likes
I saw that out of the gate.
3 Likes
Ah yes. Memes invalidate opinions. How progressive of you.
1 Like
You are welcome to your opinion. Your avatar informs others judgement and opinions.
1 Like
You’re the one that doesn’t seem to understand the difference between a private company terminating a business relationship and free speech. Pot meet kettle.
Glad to see we are down to the insult level now.
If I see someone with a Pepe avatar it tells me they are trying to tell other people about their politics.
Got anything else?
1 Like
Jesus Christ it’s not even Pepe. At least get something right.
Come again?
Can y’all like not get into a pissing match with each other?
That’d be awesome.
1 Like
Come again? You’re doing a great job deflecting the argument because you feel some animos towards me.
So to quote the link you posted.
Apu Apustaja (“Help Helper” in English) is a poorly drawn variation of Pepe the Frog created in the style of Spurdo Spärde.
Back on topic people
3 Likes
Got a point. Speaking of which…
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/suspected-pittsburgh-shooter-allegedly-had-003500259.html
If anyone is making a credible threat of violence, or otherwise conspiring to commit a crime, this is a law enforcement matter. These people should be referred to law enforcement, rather than being banned, so that law enforcement can monitor them and take appropriate steps. If, on the other hand, these miscreants are banned and effectively driven underground, how can we expect law enforcement to effectively do their job, once these people are effectively kicked off of the radar scope? We can’t.
1 Like