What's new

Welcome to Japan Reference (JREF) - the community for all Things Japanese.

Join Today! It is fast, simple, and FREE!

My new Facebook ban and anonymity

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Well my latest account was banned on Facebook, or at least, they will not let me continue without giving them a cell phone number. This account lasted quite a while and I can only guess why it was banned this time. It could have something to do with the Democratic primaries? I don't even know when they are but I have been lashing out hard against people attacking Bernie Sanders ruthlessly with lies and crazy talk while treating Michael Bloomberg with kid gloves or not even talking about him. Some of those pages seem to be a total psy op, such as one called "Americans against the Democratic and Republican Parties". Its like they are paid for by Bloomberg.

In any case I think it is sad and dangerous how much social media companies like Fascist Book control modern political discourse.

And its crazy how they keep demanding my phone number and real name, as if they need it what with all the sheep that give all that up willingly. Or as if all these people who gave their real names and phone numbers are somehow responsible and honest for doing it....they aren't.

My questions are: Do you worry about the power of social media companies and how they control or steer public discourse? Do you think something needs to be done to rein them in? Also, do you think anonymity and privacy should be a right even on social media platforms?
 

Uncle Frank

SECURITY
Admin
Joined
21 May 2003
Messages
11,529
Reaction score
1,421
f22.jpg f6.jpg f48.jpg f55.jpg f69.jpg f73.jpg f75.jpg fb150.jpg fb151.jpg
 

Uncle Frank

SECURITY
Admin
Joined
21 May 2003
Messages
11,529
Reaction score
1,421
How malicious and self serving. No one would doubt you were a America cop, that's for sure.
Spoken from someone who thinks he knows all and is the only one who believes it. If America could ban you , it would , just like Facebook has. Hopefully , as you age , your mind will open up to let some knowledge in. PS...the point of my above post was show sympathy for your dislike of Facebook as I have been censored and banned by Facebook in the past. Seems for some unknown reason you took it as an attack?
 

Mycernius

The Hairy Wookie
Joined
4 Feb 2005
Messages
4,511
Reaction score
196
FB has never asked me for my mobile number. As for banning, that is down to members reporting your posts. Some very nasty people post on FB who do not like ANY opinions that differ from theirs. Instead of discourse they resort to the cowards way and report you, usually on multiple accounts.
 

Uncle Frank

SECURITY
Admin
Joined
21 May 2003
Messages
11,529
Reaction score
1,421
I was a bit shocked for the reason I was banned. I posted a picture of Muslim extremists in the US with signs demanding Sharia law be used and signs saying death to non-Muslims and signs saying they would take over America and make it a Muslim country. My comment under the picture was that I was surprised so many showed up at that protest and were so open in their demands. The reason given for my ban was I was spreading hate speech.
 

SmudgyBuddy

Kouhai
Joined
15 Feb 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
30
I was banned from Facebook for thirty days for posting a picture of an anime girl in a French maid outfit, she wasn't naked, but it immediately somehow went against community guidelines. But, when I played a hentai game with spicy scenes, they kept it up. The Facebook algorithm is one hell of a baka.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
The Facebook algorithm is one hell of a baka.

I have heard that one. I have also heard that human moderators are often underpaid people from impoverished countries that have very specific and hard conservative social mores that don't quite work on an international stage.

I have often felt it was radical feminists on my case most of all. But who knows? Its not like we anything from the horse's mouth is it?
 

SmudgyBuddy

Kouhai
Joined
15 Feb 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
30
I'm pretty sure they get them from the safe-space areas. One of their policies that is amusing: No nipples can be show in a picture, unless it was shown for a protest, or artistic purposes.

Basically, what femenazis do. They're allowed to show their tits in order to undermine men with their protests.
You know what they say about liberal art majors, they ride that carousel like champs.
 

TGI-ECT

後輩
Joined
6 Jan 2007
Messages
306
Reaction score
84
I thought some media platform out there had stated a policy of no political posts, or some such sort of thing.

As for this political stuff, I remember when I was drafted back in the early 70s and all the demonstrations against military this and military that and I very quickly decided I better ignore it all and just not let it get in the way of what I had to do. See, I was playing games with a force that no human has control over — Mother Nature and one game she loves to play on us who dare to climb up there and face her — her winds.

Actually, her winds are sometimes just as much a problem down around the airfield and LZs at lower altitudes, too.

But once you start going up against Mother Nature for keeps, you sort of realize that humans ain't so powerful at all.

But in a general sense, I don't think the U.S. of A. is such a bad place to live, or be under the control of. I have most definitely seen worse. Have lived within the borders of worse.

Nope, the U.S. of A. is not such a bad country.

By the way, if y'all haven't figured out something yet, let me let you in on a little secret.

It is the thousands and thousands of General Schedule folks in the U.S. of A. that are what keeps the nation's infrastructure going. Them POTUS folks come and go and the GS folks just keep right on doing their job and probably very much like they did before a particular POTUS moved into that White building thingy and those GS folks will do the same job the same way after this POTUS leaves and the next one and so on for a very long time.

Bottom line; it ain't the folks at the top of the ladder that makes the country what it is.
 

SmudgyBuddy

Kouhai
Joined
15 Feb 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
30
That is very interesting account there. I personally don't believe in politics. I think that it's all a game of accusations, lies, and manipulation, and it's better suited for the morally defunct. My observation is the people with authority makes the laws they don't obey. Same thing with SJW on twitter who complain about a game featuring assets (tits, hip bone, cleavage, thigh skin) in the hopes of changing it, and when they do, and the developer bends the knee, the complainers don't buy it. It is just a power play. It's an amazing parallel down to the plebs.
 

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
4,182
Reaction score
1,501
My questions are: Do you worry about the power of social media companies and how they control or steer public discourse? Do you think something needs to be done to rein them in? Also, do you think anonymity and privacy should be a right even on social media platforms?
Yes. Yes. Yes but not absolute.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Yes. Yes. Yes but not absolute.

What is anonymity if its not absolute? And why would it be undesirable to not be absolute?

Are you afraid of receiving an explosive pixel? Or do you imagine that a way will be found to identify virus creating hackers who would want to remain anonymous?
 

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
4,182
Reaction score
1,501
I feel that there are many bad actors (consider Russian operations to affect US elections) and absolute anonymity is dangerous for society. At the same time the lack of anonymity is detrimental to society and individuals trying to speak the truth (like the countless people in China).

I don’t have any answers here. Just concerns.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
I feel that there are many bad actors (consider Russian operations to affect US elections) and absolute anonymity is dangerous for society. At the same time the lack of anonymity is detrimental to society and individuals trying to speak the truth (like the countless people in China).

I don’t have any answers here. Just concerns.


My answer is moderation without censorship. Those suspected of being trolls get marked, but not deleted. Features should exist for all browsers to be able to block those so marked and meanwhile, people like myself that do not fear trolls, but merely hate them, will be able to see what they write and judge for themselves.
 

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
4,182
Reaction score
1,501
My answer is moderation without censorship. Those suspected of being trolls get marked, but not deleted. Features should exist for all browsers to be able to block those so marked and meanwhile, people like myself that do not fear trolls, but merely hate them, will be able to see what they write and judge for themselves.
What about people not like yourself that can’t seem to judge for themselves? Like people that read falsehoods and convince themselves that a presidential candidate is running a child trafficking ring in a pizza shop and inflict real damage to the pizza shop or candidate? It’s often difficult or impossible to get restitution after the fact even if it leads to criminal acts.

Just one example:
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
What about people not like yourself that can’t seem to judge for themselves?

If moderators have clearly labeled an account as "troll" and clearly marked posts and videos as "fake news", "lies" and "trolling", and the moderators are correct, and yet, some people believe that garbage, what makes you think destroying anonymity (or even trying) is going to sort those people out? People have been believing crazy crap since the dawn of man and the internet is just a new tool.

Its very simple.....label, mark and cover stuff people might find objectionable. Give them software/features to block such stuff or not as they choose.

And I will add another reason: absolute power corrupts absolutely. No moderator/admin/ site owner should have the power to delete a god damned thing other people post cause that absolute power corrupts them.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Just one example:

What if he is not a liar but a whistleblower? What if everything he said was actually true? I never visited that shop. I don't think you did. How do we know?

Also, its a bad example for you because despite anonymity, he was caught. Here is a concept for you: give people enough rope to hang themselves. It works. It really does. It worked in the case of the pet shop disparager. Making a martyr of a person often back-fires however and I cite Alex Jones for that.
 

Lothor

Proofreader extraordinaire
Moderator
Donor
Joined
26 Sep 2015
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
804
No moderator/admin/ site owner should have the power to delete a god damned thing other people post.
Unfortunately some people with this view (not you) believe that this gives them the right to be as unpleasant as they like about others then bleat about censorship when their offensive material is removed. I've also noticed that when the Japanese government occasionally belated updates laws about possession of child pornography, all kinds of weirdos, who normally wouldn't give a flying **** about the rights of others to express their views, suddenly crawl out of the woodwork and start complaining about censorship on forums. I often find that the people who are noisiest about free speech are those least fit to exercise the right (not you again!).

By the way, I'm not convinced by your comments about pixels. We live in a society where signs have very strong and usually widely understood meanings. Telling someone that they are silly getting upset about pixels is no different from telling someone they are silly getting upset about a swastika drawn in pencil because they are upset about some graphite molecules.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Telling someone that they are silly getting upset about pixels is no different from telling someone they are silly getting upset about a swastika drawn in pencil because they are upset about some graphite molecules.

The logic holds.

Remember the debate about changing the Buddhist swastikas on maps before the Olympics come? I consider the swastikas to be a teaching opportunity. I got no love for the hope that ignorance will fix the world. Anyway, erase the swastikas from the maps and then they go to the temples and see swastikas engraved in stone. Does that play out better?

Okay, look. I am just completely fqing sick of people's little feelings about what they saw or what they read. FQ everyone's feelings. If people are so fqing sensitive they should lock themselves in a fortress and only interact with people who give a FQ about their little feelings. OR we could just give them the tools to block out what they don't like on the net while people with a bit of testicular fortitude can still see everything.
 
Last edited:

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
I've also noticed that when the Japanese government occasionally belated updates laws about possession of child pornography, all kinds of weirdos, who normally wouldn't give a flying **** about the rights of others to express their views, suddenly crawl out of the woodwork and start complaining about censorship on forums.

Well you may have thought you noticed, but as someone who has been censored time and time again for complaining about censorship, essentially because the censors running the show didn't like the criticism, I feel confident in telling you you are not being given the whole picture. And see? That's my whole damn point. You can't see the whole picture, the whole picture is being kept from you, you are advocating hiding some of the picture while insisting its just as good as the whole picture. Its not. It creates false impressions and I think you have one there.

Also, scratch a bit deeper. Imagine you run a huge international social media site and you want to destroy debate about the freedom of speech by damaging the reputations of those who advocate it. How do you do it? Trim their discussions and leave the advocation of child porn. In fact, goad them into posting about that one more and voila! Free speech advocates now look like perverts. I think you ate that one hook, line and sinker.

But please do go to JT and post about their garbage moderation. One thing you will note is that there are no articles about that. There are however articles about child porn laws and censorship. So you get to talk about one but not the other. So what do you get? Missing picture parts and false impressions.

Censorship is shyte unless you hold the keys and have an agenda. Then its grand.
 

Lothor

Proofreader extraordinaire
Moderator
Donor
Joined
26 Sep 2015
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
804
Okay, look. I am just completely fqing sick of people's little feelings about what they saw or what they read. FQ everyone's feelings. If people are so fqing sensitive they should lock themselves in a fortress and only interact with people who give a FQ about their little feelings. OR we could just give them the tools to block out what they don't like on the net while people with a bit of testicular fortitude can still see everything.
Or we can try and create communities, either in real life or online, where people feel comfortable in participating without the need to brace themselves and check that they have testicular fortitude before taking part, which for me is a far better aim than providing unlimited free speech to people, unfortunately some of whom abuse then use the concept as a shield.

I've got no plans to go to JT and post about their garbage moderation - I stopped visiting the site a few years ago; I hated the way the moderators and trolls poisoned the atmosphere there. I do sympathise with you for the treatment that you got. I don't think this discussion is going to go any further because we've got a fundamentally different viewpoint. I make a strong distinction between the freedom to criticise in the name of free speech and the freedom to harm in the name of free speech, whereas you don't make that distinction (not that I'm suggesting you would use the latter freedom). The distinction may not always be 100% clear cut, which makes moderation a difficult task and prone to abuse, but it does exist.
 
Last edited:

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
4,182
Reaction score
1,501
And I will add another reason: absolute power corrupts absolutely. No moderator/admin/ site owner should have the power to delete a god damned thing other people post cause that absolute power corrupts them.

All these forums are essentially private property so of course the owners have the power. And that makes many of them dictatorships. I get your point though.

Also, its a bad example for you because despite anonymity, he was caught. Here is a concept for you: give people enough rope to hang themselves. It works. It really does. It worked in the case of the pet shop disparager. Making a martyr of a person often back-fires however and I cite Alex Jones for that.
That’s my point. If he had absolute anonymity he may have not gotten caught.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
I don't think this discussion is going to go any further because we've got a fundamentally different viewpoint.

You are correct that this discussion won't go any further but its because you are not freaking listening that is the problem.

Or we can try and create communities, either in real life or online, where people feel comfortable in participating without the need to brace themselves

That right there is proof you are not listening. You don't listen then you will ever understand a thing I say. Trying listening. Or don't. You can live in your own bubble to a degree if you want. But I don't want to live in your bubble. No one should be forced to live in anyone's damn bubble. Its called "choice" and it will seem a lot cooler to you when you don't have one.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
All these forums are essentially private property so of course the owners have the power.

Ownership is 9/10ths of the law and I think that's garbage and needs to change. That is what kings and queens are based on and basically, its why we still have a feudal system in fact if not in name. It needs to be altered severely. Read my sig. Its in there.
 
Top Bottom