***InfoComms Bill Of Rights***: What should be included?

#14

Id like to add that we need some sort of standard set that if you abuse the flagging capability just based on differing of opinions, the abuser should either A: have that capability taken away, B: account on hold, C; or trust level declined.

I equate abusing the flagging capability to abusing first responders or calling 911 for non-emergencies.

4 Likes
#15

Makes sense in the way of wasting the forum moderators time.

When Owen talked about having notifications blowing his phone up because of flagging well, maybe there should be that existing rule.

That’s why I made that Zimmerman meme a long time ago when @TheIsz and I were going at it.

2 Likes
#16

I know you said no paragraphs, but…

Well, I think the veil is and has been drawn off of this entire “social media” platform concept as a whole.

What we know about social media platforms like FB, Twitter, IG, etc is simple. These were entire platforms designed to construct social networks for people to connect.

The problem is, the minute people we’re given the chance to upload personal content, such as personal info, (birthday, location, age, birth location, etc) photos, info on how they know other people, etc. all the way down to personal tastes and things they liked, they voluntarily gave that info up, and we now know that BIG TECH is in the business of BIG DATA and the like. More importantly, what can be done with it. Sold to 3rd parties, used to swing thoughts on issues, both personal and political, down to even purchasing decisions, and it has not gone well.

I think the era of social media is going to see an evolving death, because people are learning what has been done with these social constructs.

The bigger issue is net censorship, net neutrality, and most importantly net monitoring.

I always thought the website forum concept, like infocomms, is the best. People are just thirsty for faster methods to engage, and the FB’s of the world were born. Now people are reverting back to forums like these because it brings balance back to the way the data is gathered, posted, and moderated.

Simply put, I say let the social media platforms DIE. Let people slow the advancement of TECH and how we engage in it, to protect ourselves from falling back into these BIG TECH traps.

It will avoid a lot of the aforementioned questions. Bottom line, you post stuff on the internet that is illegal, you will get arrested, prosecuted, and taken to court to plead your case.

5 Likes
#17

If there are things you would change or think can be better what would those things be?

2 Likes
#18

Flagging is okay for a call to attention for the moderators to check it out and the accused should be able to defend themselves. There needs to be moderators otherwise there is just robots flagging and banning. Several people can decide they don’t like someone and they can all go in and flag that person. So that does not work. There has to be due process, intervention between the mods and the person being flagged.

3 Likes
#19

I think every website, every forum out there is a community. Each community has its rules. It is important for the moderators of this site to outline very clearly and specifically what it stands for.

Clearly, every single person that creates an account NEEDS to conform to the community guidelines to keep their account.

These rules are what govern the users activity and if it violated, the owners of the site and its contents have to protect it, because if some loon posts something over it, and something happens, ultimately, the site owner can be held responsible. And that is no bueno.

So… it’s simple, like anything you do in the world when you go out in public, conform to the law.

So, are you asking two separate questions here below?

Digital Bill of rights = INTERNET

Community Rules = INFOWARS FORUM

I would encourage everyone to have their own website and encourage them to publish whatever views they have about issues and how they see the world, but if you are going to engage onto a community, the public square, you have to make sure you are not breaking the law. Simple.

You can search the internet for anything on how from making weapons to moonshine, if you want that go find it, cool, but don’t post it onto a community forum that sheds bad light onto the community and could compromise what it stands for. I think we all know this, and it is common sense. That can and should be moderated by the site owners, at their discretion.

How much is too much? Well, I think it’s common sense. I mean if you have to question what you are about to post, it’s probably too much.

#20

I think there are way too many catagories. Also people should be able to post activism video, pics of posters what ever there activism is. They should be able to post it in any catagory.

1 Like
#21

What do you mean by what you “have been doing”?

What do you mean when you say, you are “being painted as the bad guy”?

3 Likes
#22

Really? There are literally only 4 categories, and 1 is uncategorized! I think we need more structure, personally.

The FEMA regions should be organized into a subcat under activism

2 Likes
#23

I think @Pippydop means there too many topics or threads not categories.

5 Likes
#24

Agreed! We commented on that thread yesterday.

3 Likes
#25

Everything historical must be protected in historical context. History must be learned from, not banned.

3 Likes
#26

I would like to see activists put in each state to rally activism together in that state.

2 Likes
#27

Everything is getting scrolled down fast.

3 Likes
#28

Agree!:fist_right::boom::fist_left:

1 Like
#29

This is a good idea!

1 Like
#30

Agreed :fist_right::boom::fist_left:

2 Likes
#31

Can an Internet Bill of Rights work if you don’t own the Internet?

1 Like
#32

Did the American Bill of Rights work even though we are not owned by the USA.

1 Like
#33

Make Private Property Rights Great Again. I want the freedom to do whatever I want with my computer. So, if I own my computer, then I should have all the rights to do anything with websites, software, viruses, programs, etc, etc, whatever that might be on my computer, which might travel around the Internet, I should have the right to do anything with my computer, if I own it, have it, possess it, actually, not virtually, but only if I possess it physically in real life (IRL), as in it has to be tangible, not theoretical or hypothetical, but practical,that is if I own my computer and anything that is in it, assuming I own what is in the computer, both hardware and software alike, but only to the extent it does not violate the private property rights of other people, and possibly excluding some alleged copyright/ patent/ trademark/ etc claims and perhaps some alleged virtual property claims, etc, etc, etc.

1 Like