Never depend on information from a company that sells information

So which information can we depend on?

Oh hell if I know man

It's a private company and can do what they want

There's no such thing as free speech in America except for the few places that are owned by the government like parks govt buildings and some rivers

At least according to republicans

I completely agree. Did I say something that would make you think I thought they didnt have that right?

Its sarcasm

These new reagan era conservatives that fear the govt protecting there rights and think only the govt is scary but worship corporations that walk all over them

Shit man. I brain farted on two comments in a row. Nite shift. Sleep problems. Ok..new response..

Yeah free speech goes anywhere pretty much, but it doesnt extend to a private forum such as facebook. I think freedom of speech mostly just protects you from the government limiting your speech. You cant come in my house and tell me how much I suck because of free speech. Well you can but you gotta leave when I say so.

Normally it wouodnt

But in facebooks case it does

Facebook has 2 billion users. And if we're going to talk about how Russia influence the election by buying a few thousand dollars worth of ads on Facebook then you can't claim that Facebook isn't influencing the election when it does billions of dollars worth of that on its own own

It's already been ruled that private property doesn't negate the Constitution

If it did then the only places you would be allowed to have free speech are on public land like Parks or government buildings and any private property the Constitution wouldn't apply apply

The courts have already ruled in the past even on private property you have free speech. There have been cases brought against towns owned by mining companies and the courts rule in favor of free speech. Even though the whole town is private property

Facebook is actually bigger than that because I didn't compasses entire countries. You don't have an alternative. There's no alternative to Facebook there's no other website you can go to that has all the friends and people that you can communicate with that you could on Facebook.

Is laws on the books that say telecoms can't answer you. Imagine if your phone company could decide to stop letting you call certain people? Or implement speech recognition and sensor certain things that you say over the phone?

There's laws against that even the phone companies are private companies companies

Being a private company doesn't give make you a king

In fact the Constitution doesn't even Grant any rights to a company. Corporations have no rights under the Constitution. Only the people in the corporations have rights under the Constitution. Because the Constitution applies to Citizens. A corporation cannot be a citizen because it is not a living thing thing

I am not sure where to start there. I guess let me try the simple route...

Freedom of speech is about the government limiting your speech. No matter how big faecbook is, it is not the government and it does own the space you are using while on facebook. Its size is irrelevant. The constitution does not give you the right to a social media platform. The social media platform gives you a right to use it and speak as much as you would like about things it approves of. It limits speech all day every day. It can limit your speech all it likes. The fact that you dont hae an alternative is extremely irrelevant and will get you sympathy from nobody. You should stop focusing on where your feet are while speaking cause that is not really what matters either. If you went to a totally public government owned place and started shouting curse words you would be kicked right the F out. No questions asked.

I think you should read the amendment and rethink things. I am not trying to be a dick here, you clearly believe what you are saying and I can see where your opinion is coming from, but its not correct.

No. Freedom of speech is about anybody limiting your freedom of speech.

You might be getting your right to free speech get it confused with the First Amendment

Now as far as the first amendment goes it applies to both the government and large corporations and private property

We've been over this. The courts have ruled on this. Courts in various states have ruled that The First Amendment will also apply to private property. And you might not agree with that. You might want corporations to have more power over to people. And if you do you can feel free to vote for politicians who will amend the Constitution to give corporations more power. But until then they don't have that power

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/501/case.html

http://stlr.org/2016/11/21/4253/

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorship/courtcases

Now you're right. There's no specific law Against Facebook censoring people who they want. That's the great thing about the United States. Facebook isn't the government. Therefore we can vote for a government that will pass a law about that.

Now you might feel differently. You might believe that corporations are more important than citizens. You might have taken King George's side in the Revolutionary War.

And you're free to vote for politicians who plays corporate interests above the interests of the people people

Did you say I was getting my right to free speech confused with the first amendment? There is no need to address any of the rest of your post until you tell me that was a typo.

The fact that you think that rights are just granted to you by the First Amendment proves that there's no point in talking to you

I think that rights concerning speech are granted by the 1st. But that is because of the well know fact that they are. And its a good thing. And if you do not want to talk about it at this point its a relief.

I think we have found a sovereign citizen in the wilds of reddit.

"advocates Against corporations"

"Sovereign citizen"

You know people argue or what turn people off from the Republican party. In general most conservatives agree that corporations are a problem. But it's you libertarian types that think that corporations are above people that push people to vote for the Democrats

• poor understanding of US Law
  
• picks and chooses court case without fully reading or comprehending them thinking they support his belief.
  
• changes argument about freedom about corporate control
  

Sounds like sovereign citizen to me are you saying this is not true?

The Court concluded that “the more an owner for his advantag opens up his property for use by the public in genera the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it.” (Marsh v. Alabama326 U.S. 501

I think that's pretty clear.

Strange you never responded to my question if you are a Sovereign citizen. I will press on regardless, Yes the SCOTUS expanded or more appropriately clarified that you retain your rights even on corporate owned towns. The points that matter is first that this only mattered as has been pointed out to you repeatedly that these protections are from the government. It was saying that someone could not have been arrested detained or evicted by government employees however it did state the corporations retained the ability to restrict peoples access. This is a good thing but does not in any way support your continued statements or continued misunderstanding of the first amendment. If one day they expand this rights into social media this might be good or might be a disaster however as of now there is no such right.

"sarcasm"

Your response shows a deep lack of understanding of US law. Free speech is alive and well but 'only' and I repeat 'only' counts in connection with our government. The first amendment only states the government will make no law abridging the freedom of speech. This in no way protects you from real world consequences of your speech, only that the government cannot stop you from speaking your mind. A private company can refuse you a platform or even fire you if you work for them and that does not violate the first amendment. The government provides no protection from other entities.

So if somebody else prevents you from saying something that's fine but your free speech is only important for the government

Okay well I don't like what you're saying so I'm going to find you and rip your tongue out. And it's fine because I'm not the government so it's not a violation of your rights

It would not be a violation of my speech you have that much correct. It would be assault and if this was the real world you would have communicated a threat so if we were face to face you could be arrested for saying this type of thing. Did you even take civics in high school?

lol OMG was gonna ask about civics! But also am cracking up thining about a guy with no tongue complaining not about the malicious wounding he received but his free speech violation. And even more loling that you could consider if a free speech violation because its is tongue which he needs for speaking.

It kind of scares me the lack of common sense. Two guys get into an argument at a bar and one beats the ever living crap out of the other. Can you imagine that free speech would come up in the trial? I even see these arguments at work where someone complains that the company tells people what they cannot say during working hours is a violation of free speech.

I am worried also. I just responded to a wopper not sure if it was the same guy, I hoe it was.

When I get pissed at customers at work I would love tell them where they can stick it and then fight my termination on the grounds of free speech.

Can’t tell if you’re trolling.

The 1st amendment literally states “Congress shall make no law...” because it’s an amendment that limits the governments power over an individual’s right to express themselves.

With very few exceptions does the 1st amendment control a private individual’s right to communicate with another private individual.

If you don’t like what another individual is saying and choose to assault them as a result, that actually is a violation of the law (and their rights), and you’ll face the consequences.

Pretty easy stuff.

Show me the part of the Constitution that says Congress can't make a law-enforcing free speech on Facebook?

The purpose of the 1st amendment isn’t to enforce free speech, it’s to prevent the limitation of free speech by the government.

I feel like you’re in an argument about free speech without having read the first amendment.

I know what it says. But it applies to private property too

It prevents private property from limiting free speech

The courts have ruled on this

Now if you want them first amendment only apply to the government and you want private companies to be able to censor people and rigged elections and you can vote for candidates in Congress who promised to a man to the Constitution to allow corporations more power

You are completely misinterpreting the rulings. Let me simplify this a bit.

Can you set up a soap box in the middle of a retail store and start talking about your favorite topic without permission from the store manager?

Yea

And the worst they can do to stop you is kick you out of the store.

I can't somehow sense of your speech while you're in the store

And since Facebook doesn't have anything in its terms of service specifically disallowing conservative speech then censorship or Banning for it could be a form of breach of contract

And even though the store owner could kick you out. If we wanted we could elect congressman who would pass a law saying that they can't kick you out for

Banning for it could be a form of breach of contract

I see you have not read the terms and conditions of facebook.

And the worst they can do to stop you is kick you out of the store.

Right because you don't have free speech on private property.

And since Facebook doesn't have anything in its terms of service specifically disallowing conservative speech then censorship or Banning for it could be a form of breach of contract

Check section 3.2 of the Facebook TOS. Facebook gives themselves the power to remove anything they want, their [community standards](facebook.com/communitystandards) cover pretty much everything as something that can be removed.

If we wanted we could elect congressman who would pass a law saying that they can't kick you out for

The government cannot force a business to accept speech that they disagree with. Otherwise you would have anti-smoking protesters picketing inside the Marlboro offices.

The courts have ruled on this

Sources?

I’m fine with the amendment the way it is. I’m fine with it applying only to the government, and fine with private companies being able to limit the free speech of those who work for them or use their platforms.

If Facebook, YouTube or twitter want to limit my ability to say something, then I can take my business elsewhere or start my own website.

I love how idiots like you support Democrat cheating.

If you have to lose elections and lose all of your other rights including gun rights just so you can clutch your pearls little tighter you're perfectly fine with it it

Thankfully you don't specifically choose to government it's a voting process and the majority of Americans don't agree with you

So while you can cry all you want that your corporate Masters have to deal with those awful things called laws the rest of us will vote in people who will change the laws so that corporations can't do that

So I just want to get this straight: you’re saying that the party of freedom of speech, “hands off government”, capitalism and big business deregulation, which derogatorily refers to people as “snowflakes” wants to enact laws that will actually regulate a businesses ability to operate as they please, and will limit the businesses own freedom of speech by forcing them to allow anyone to post anything they wish on their platform? Is this real life? 🤔🤔🤔

Rule #10

Doing so would be a restriction on Facebook's right to free speech, which is what is explicitly prohibited in the Constitution.

Facebook's right to free speech includes the right to prohibit it from others because they are not the government.

Hes not gonna back down man. Hes just made a post and there are a handful of kids in agreement.

Yeah, ignorance is bliss and all that jazz.

Hopefully someone else who is actually interested in the truth will see it and learn something.

In this case it doesnt seem like his ignorance is blissful. I mean he honestly believes his rights are being violated by facebook. Thats gotta be pretty stressful man. In this case I think its a truth shall set you free type deal. But the truth isnt relavent when it comes to a milienials assumed rights.

(he wont tell me how old he is, but c'mon we both know whats happening.)

Lol, be careful with lumping all the millennials in one basket there! I'm 35 and somehow technically one and I'm all "Hello, fellow kids!" over here.

But yeah, agreed. I'm actually kinda embarrassed for him, tbh.

Lol look at all the ignorant idiots who dont understand the constitution

Its funny watching u guys bow to and worship corporations like that

1) that is the most cucky shill explanation ever. Stopping somebody else from Talking isn't part of your right to free speech speech

2) Facebook has no constitutional rights. Facebook has no rights at all. Facebook is a corporation NOT a person.

Corporations have no rights under the Constitution. Only citizens do. And even if you wanted to apply the Constitution to all people it still wouldn't apply to those that aren't people people

The Constitution doesn't apply to a cat or a tree. And at least those are living things

So no. Facebook has no rights. The people in Facebook might have constitutional rights. But Facebook does not

The Constitution was never written to give corporations any rights

Maybe you remember Citizens United?

Hobby Lobby?

Those cases are examples of corporate personhood, which says corporations have the same rights as individual citizens in some cases.

The laws of the United States hold that a legal entity (like a corporation or non-profit organization) shall be treated under the law as a person except when otherwise noted. This rule of construction is specified in 1 U.S.C. §1 (United States Code),[13] which states:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise—

the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;

[removed]

Not to mention none of that matters if Congress passes a law extending freedom of speech to Facebook. Which is what most people want want

Which is what most people want? Who wants this? What studies can you cite?

Rule #10

This is the worst understanding of US Law ever & I am a fucking liberal from hell. It’s like someone took a first grade understanding of free speech and wrote it as an adult...

Dumbest comment in a while.

Mine?

Well the tongue ripping would hopefully still be illegal in the US.

It's a private company and can do what they want

Not if they break the contract with customer. Then they can be sued. If the company promised you free speech (FB did), but then broke that promise, they're liable.

Besides, govt regulations favouring free speech can be imposed on them also.

I agree with this

I was being sarcastic

Both of those things are true as well as the fact that the government could simply classify them as a public forum and then Free Speech absolutely applies to them.

Cuckservatives want them to be able to do whatever they want and influence elections

I agree with this

I was being sarcastic

Also, there’s a related case of that famous small bakery that was being forced to bake a gay wedding cake – against their wishes. All the leftists said they MUST do it, although it’s a private business.

But now their right not to bake the cake has been vindicated.

Question - Could you please quote the exact wording in Facebook's Terms of Service that promises users unrestricted freedom of speech on Facebook?

(Spoiler Alert: no, you can't. Because it doesn't exist.)

Followup question - Could you please quote the Federal law, statute, or constitutional amendment that would allow the government to compell Facebook to give a platform to speech that violates their Terms of Service?

(Spoiler Alert: See previous spoiler alert.)

lol their TOS is the exact opposite of a freedom of speech guarantee!

Question - Could you please quote the exact wording in Facebook's Terms of Service that promises users unrestricted freedom of speech on Facebook?

I didn’t say ‘unrestricted’. I’m not a lawyer, and I’m not going to analyse their weasel legalese. I’m sure it’s already been done before, anyway.

But they most certainly did promise ‘freedom of speech’ in the general sense. I already gave a quote from Daily Telegraph below.

When did facebook promise you free-speech? Never. Read the terms of service.

Here we go,

Facebook and Twitter promise to crack down on internet hate speech (May 31, 2016) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/05/31/facebook-and-twitter-promise-to-crack-down-on-internet-hate-spee/

Paywalled, but here's the quote,

"The likes of Facebook and Twitter have vowed to protect free speech online"

It's a private company and can do what they want

The worst excuse possible. The free flow of information on the internet should be guaranteed by human rights provisions. ISPs shouldn't be able to throttle connections in violation of net neutrality, many people concede this principle. Why should social media companies be able to remove users on the basis of the kind of information they are sharing? If they were paying for their Facebook pages, they'd be getting the shit sued out of them. The fact that the service is paid for with the information mined from users is the only thing keeping people from widely being outraged about this.

What law says you can't "upload porn and shit"?

If your argument is that free speech applies everywhere without restriction, wouldn't "pork and shit" be covered as well?

The government may make no law that infringes or restricts your right to express yourself. That's it. That does not extend to the private property of others.

What law says you can't "upload porn and shit"?

I don't recall stating that there was a law that restricted uploading of "porn and shit" to the internet. Kind of a strange claim to make.

If your argument is that free speech applies everywhere without restriction

Where did I state that again?

Your words.

Free speech should be a compulsory protection for information technology companies that are based on the sharing and exchange of information. If you aren't breaking the law or uploading porn and shit, your page shouldn't be removed. This should be standard.

If you aren't breaking the law or uploading porn and shit,

See above. Operative word being OR.

The government may make no law that infringes or restricts your right to express yourself. That's it. That does not extend to the private property of others.

Yet the governments -- federal and states -- do just that.

Over half of all US States now have laws that prohibit state agencies from doing business or entering into contracts with persons or entities that support boycotting Israel (a foreign nation) in any way.

The Federal government is working to craft similar restrictions.

Would you care to take a WILD GUESS as to which groups have been pushing such draconian laws through? Did you know that it is these SAME GROUPS that are pushing private companies (Fakebook, Twatter, Weddit, etc) into shoving censorship -- in all forms -- on their users?

A

D

L

Can you provide sources, please?

Can you provide sources, please?

Yes, I can. But you'll have to tell me which SPECIFIC parts of my statement you doubt, and WHY.

I'm not wasting my time otherwise.

That states are enacting laws which make it illegal to do business with companies that boycott Israel.

See my edit to the above comment ...

https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/8wzyqa/warning_facebook_has_gone_full_purge_theyre/e21h4tc/

No, I didn't. That's blatant.

Marsh v. Alabama, ownership "does not always mean absolute dominion." The court pointed out that the more an owner opens his property up to the public in general, the more his rights are circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who are invited in.

In its conclusion, the Court stated that it was essentially weighing the rights of property owners against the rights of citizens to enjoy freedom of press and religion. The Court noted that the rights of citizens under the Bill of Rights occupy a preferred position. Accordingly, the Court held that the property rights of a private entity are not sufficient to justify the restriction of a community of citizens' fundamental rights and liberties.

This has yet to be applied to Facebook and others, but likely could be.

Fox News

Thyself.

Why would you want to depend on information?

That seems like a lot of work.

You need information to survive, one way or another. You're right though; it's a ton of work

One can only trust his own eyes today.. hell maybe not even that thanks to bluebeam. If there’s one figure I personally trust it’s

QAnon

Cause otherwise there is no hope.

Make no mistake people, reddit is just as controlled in it’s information agenda as facebook. Follow Q for the truth.

No it’s because most people know that Q is larper. No secret government agency is downvoting Reddit comments to hide conspiracies, that would be a huge waste of time.

Would it? You really believe that? Facebook is doing it. If you follow Q you would know it’s not a larp, he’s proven himself enough and will keep doing it. After over a year of posting there is no proof he’s fake. Don’t be so naive. Of course information is controlled, even on reddit.

He posted a fake picture 3ish days ago. GA did mental gymnastics to explain it, This is not the first time he’s posted a fake picture or false information. Remember the time he said an internet breaking video about Obama was about to be posted or Hilary was a day away from being indicted? And then poof nothing. Facebook controls info to sell things and also because they’ve been under fire for letting propaganda and dangerous medical advice run rampant, both of which opens them up to lawsuits. Just because there are conspiracies doesn’t mean everything is one. You make the rest of us look bad.

What makes you think she's not indicted when there are thousands still sealed? The picture wasn't fake it was a picture from someone else's phone. You don't follow so you don't know what your talking about. A video about Obama is about to be posted was never said. Stay out of it if you don't understand it, your display of ignorance makes you look bad.

There is also no proof Zeus is fake, either.

There are so many proofs that Q is part of Trumps Team. Its possible its a psyop. I dont personally thinks so, but its definitely not some random guy larping. What he says about the Army hating Barry is also true. People in the conspiracy sphere might remember the rumours of an attempted Army coup that was supposedly stopped by the Navy yard sniper shooting and covered up. Alot of what he say just fits.

My instincts are not to trust obvious mindwashing cult bullshit like the QAnon farce.

Wow such rage. Someone’s been getting mindwashed.. hahah just kidding my dude I hope it’s good money you’re making at least

When you believe every person who’s against is paid opposition it allows you to automatically dismiss every notion that may challenge your held beliefs without actually analyzing what you’re thinking or what they’re thinking. Which is just as bad as the regular public who accepts the “official” story without looking at the evidence.

Of course it’s not all of them, a fuck load of people have been brainwashed too (myself included) I know you already get it but I’ll explain for the nonshills here: Q is here to shift the global consciousness towards the truth. Why? Becuase it’s US the people that have the power. It’s all about the MAJORITY. Why do you think we’ve been brainwashed for so long? It’s to keep us obedient and on their side.

So if someone disagrees with you about Q, they're either brainwashed or a paid shill?

Of course it’s not all of them, a fuck load of people have been brainwashed too (myself included) I know you already get it but I’ll explain for the nonshills here: Q is here to shift the global consciousness towards the truth. Why? Becuase it’s US the people that have the power. It’s all about the MAJORITY. Why do you think we’ve been brainwashed for so long? It’s to keep us obedient and on their side.

No one's being led to believe anything about Q. They're just being skeptical.

You're the one being led to believe that some random user is secretly a high-level government agent part of a secret Undercover conspiracy that the media doesn't know about but it's okay to post it on 4chan

And also he somehow taking down the Deep state by posting cryptic Clues to things that are in the mainstream news

Also he somehow has more information than even the president and disable has such a power that he can make the pope say things on command but don't worry he's totally not the Deep state

He was exposed as fake the other day when he posted a fake picture (again).

Nope, you’re wrong. The reflection in the picture is of an old photo, yes. But saying that’s proof he’s fake is missing the point of his post entirely.

He called the photo “welcome aboard”. He was clearly trying to imply he was on AF1 when he was not. Mental gymnastics are not healthy.

He didn’t say that in correlation to the post you are tlaking about lol please do some research.

He said: do reflections violate nat sec rules?

The answer my simple minded friend is YES they do, which is why the pic isn’t authentic. Q is trolling the opposition that used this technique to give away information. He also said: trolling is fun. Your larp chants have no basis and get more nonsensical by the day, which is why so many know you are SHILLS.

The picture was welcomeaboard.png . I think you’re simply believing what you want to be true. Typing in all caps doesn’t make the fact that I, a regular citizen, am simply trying to educate you.

You're part of a cult that worships some random 4chan user with no evidence other than the occasional coincidence

According to you this guy has more information and power than anybody in the entire history of the world and regularly misuses that power to influence world events but don't worry he's not part of the deep state

It's not new. People get roped in by fake psychics all the time

The best proof that Q is fake is the bullshit games involved. IF he was legit, he'd give us real info like Snowden or Manning. Instead we get cryptic messages, stupid games, and open ended statements that can be interpreted however the true believers wish.

Eh... you don’t get the most basic of the facts.. you do realize it would be illegal to just “give us real info like snowden or manning”? Or are you that stupid?

Epoch Times.

information that has verified sources that's what.

email group discussion

I mean in top ironic form you’re now depending on information from a random redditor.

i dont know about you, but i find it rather poetic

I just find it funny that the people who call to abandon Facebook and social media and stop communicating with all their friends and family because can't bring themselves to leave an anonymous Forum with people that they never met in real life

I bet you arent old enough to know what life was like without social media.

Honestly it was pretty fucking sweet man. We did just fine, actually we did better. I guess thats why you feel the way you do maybe. The constitution is pretty silent on social media regulations even when a monopoly is in place. I guess the founders figured social media would be best handled by the free market.

And you're not old enough to know what life is like without cars. People did just fine before I cars so I don't know why you think you need one

Same with the internet. There was a time before the internet and people are fine. So please get off the internet

oh my. I am not guarenteed the right to drive either bud. Please slow your roll and call your father and ask what he thinks. Just for shits and giggles. I promise you there will be zero gloating or I told you so.

You actually are guaranteed the right to drive. Just not on public roads. If you buy a car you can drive it on private property all you want without a license and you don't even have to be 18

it is not illegal to drive a car on private roads when you have no license. Correct. But there is no law expressing that.

Just like its legal to fart in your own home. But an amendment was deemed not needed by the founders.

Basically rights that can not be infringed are outlined in law. But you certainly cant put in writing every possible human act can you? So laws could potentially be created so long as they do not violate what is actually laid out in the constitution.

It's only a monopoly because people choose to do it. Anyone can open a social media sites any day of the week. The Constitution doesn't protect against monopoly anyway. It's covered by anti-monopoly laws passed over the past century or so.

Myspace comeback baby!!! Who wants to be top friends??

You mean the Rupert Murdoch website?

Yeah, I guess so. But it wasnt when I was on there. Cant tell what it does anymore . But it aiint what it was.

Social media made human beings more afraid of real social interaction in my experience.

That's probably true in a lot of cases. Me it dont matter just need booze.

But then again I quit drinking 3 years ago...:(

And I am as random as they come. There are like 9 people that ever agree with me on anything. 173 points is like a month worth of points for me. Never anywhere close to the top. Gonna be a weird day I suppose...and thats ok by me.

...huh?

I was talking about your comment. Was I not the random reditor?

Uh, yep. But your sentence doesn’t make a lot of grammatical sense.

Ok I can try and break it down. I am sure their are probably errors in there, but it seems like its understandable.

What I was saying was (excuse any grammar errors please,) I am a random redditor like you said. I said that because what you said was funny so I was trying to go along with it. Then I was commenting on the fact that my comment had 173 upvotes. Well I said points, maybe thats not accurate. A good comment in upvotes for me is like 10 or 15. So in a month I may get 173 points from all of the comments I make combined. It was the top comment which has never happened to me. So for me this is unusual cause I maybe have unusual political views that can be unlikable. Or maybe its just been my grammar. I can usually tell what people are saying even when their grammar is bad. So I suppose mine was horrible if it didn't even make any sense. But if it didnt make sense than this comment might be far worse.

Caring about strangers giving anonymous votes? Someday you'll wake up and not give a shit about internet crap.

Well noticing something that bucks a trend is another way of putting it. For instance your comment does not do that. It is the kind of comment you expect from people here. You know just going out of your way to comment on something that has nothing to do with you in order to point kinda make the other person look or feel stupid. You know those too cool for school kind of guys that just have bad attitudes and act as if they dont care about something, yet went out of their way to comment on it.

You are way over analyzing.

Caring about upvotes/downvotes in anymore than a casual manner shows signs of addiction to social media, which is possibly worse for people than smoking. SNS know this, and have crafted their products to become even more addictive.

Labeling me this or that because it makes you feel better is part of the addiction. So, perhaps you'll never wake up and stop giving a shit about this crap.

To each his own.

I am an extremely analytical person. I think it is interesting. It doesnt have anything to with me as a person, or obviously whoever up or down votes. But the number is there. Its an available data point. I cannot ignore it nor do I really want to ignore it. I comment because I feel like I have something to say, and that talley regulates the visibility of that comment.

It wasnt my intention to label you as a person. I was speaking about your behavior here. As its a pattern that I have seen many times. I sometimes enjoy a back and forth with a person so much that i ignore the number and thats great because I am more into the reaction of just one person.

I think you are right about the social media addiciton being a problem. But you dont have enough information to say I have the problem.

So do you at all see anything strange about what you just did here? Randomly making a comment about what I said about upvote that was clearly antagonistic and unnecessary. Then coming back and further judging me over this internet crap that I should not give a shit about? When I dont give a shit about this internet crap am I going to start finding random comments that in not way are my business and are completely harmless and telling people how to feel about them? And then not caring so much I came back and said another thing? Then once again make fun of the person for caring about this internet crap that I am also on and clearly care about?

Maybe someone here does have a problem with this social media.

You are presenting yourself as someone who is fair and open minded, then can't help but make a nasty little dig at the end. Very passive aggressive and exposes your are not the person you think you are presenting to others.

If you can't ignore numbers, whatever, that's your thing. Just keep in mind the numbers mean nothing. Each subreddit has it's hive-mind, and subscribers can be triggered fairly easily. Comments to get upvotes/downvotes can be easily gamed, and the only people who should care are getting paid (well) to do so for profit seeking adventures. Add in shadow-ghosting, mods with dictatorial powers, and time-zone differences, Reddit is entertainment (for free) that gives a general idea of life in 2018.

OCD or Aspergers? Your hyper-sensitivity and addictions are for you to figure out.

I am sorry. I didnt mean to sound fair or open minded with you. I would but there is no need. You are a miserable little cunt that seems to want to shit on anything i say. Cause once again you are claiming that the numbers affect happiness or self worth, they don't.

It's funny how concerned you are about this. I thought you were going to end it with ur past comment and I had a small amount of respect for that.

There is something weird with the numbers. One time i sais something that wasnt special in any way and it shot up at an obviously unrealistic speed and put another guys down. Was proramming i guess.

Does that make me have asbergers? Or is it addiction? Wait...you dont care right?

I thought it made sense

I did also. But I am learning to ignore that instinct while on here. Its working well.

Not necessarily. Asking for input doesn't necessarily imply you're going to believe their answer. :P

That irony is at the core of conspiracy. You're not supposed to believe anything, but if you don't believe 9/11 was a US-plot you're naive.

In-person, human-to-human communication. We need to go back to the basics.

Reason, science. Apply skepticism to everything and you'll be fine.

Skeptical of being skeptical, reasonable, logical, and scientific. Doesn't add up. Thanks though! Nice point about information sources.

Reddit

Data

Fox News and CNN.

CNN of course, they are owned by time warner

Dependable information tends to be fact, rather than opinion, based. It comes from reliable, verifiable sources.

Any information received from any source should be scrutinized for facts and have critical reasoning applied. More evidence should be sought before accepting anything as true.

Sources should be a verified publisher known for accuracy, evidence-based reporting and verifying the facts with multiple sources.

The more evidence given through data, peer review and verifiable physical evidence, the more dependable the source. For example, medical journals have extremely high standards for verifying evidence of a medical claims by enforcing peer reviewed evidence and repeatability of test results.

In general, it is better to hold off on making a judgement before knowing the facts or verifying the source. Critical thinking is skepticism - question and doubt anyone who appeals to emotion, not sources or to blind faith without evidence.

I'm sorry I had to downvote you due to the previous President, Mr. Obama, signing in to law new propaganda rules that discredit verified sources. I still don't know the full ramifications of this in things like science journals, business releases, and other formal articles.

On top of that most everything else is overly sensational.

You have to expose yourself to a variety of sources, consider possible biases and conflicts of interest, and then draw an EDUCATED conclusion. You know ... think.

The average of everything. Trust no one, but listen to everyone.

... unless you keep praying them yourself.

Maybe you should lay down for a bit, huh?

Never think of someone who makes a livelihood from selling information, as OP admits to in his other comments, as a free speech activist.

Protect the libraries?

Yeah, sure. I am certainly not anti-library. Lets protect those bad boys!

https://deletefacebook.com

Just dont ever trust that your info is actually gone.

Pretty glad I got rid of Facebook a while ago. People think it's crazy I don't have to. But...

Ya i deleted my fb for good in 2014 and never looked back. fuck facebook

Since 2012 for me. Easiest thing I've ever given up, actually.

Good. The more "hollostic" people that leave the better Facebook will be for everyone else

Facebook cebsored u cuz they dont want u on the platform.

Ur not making them cry

Thanks for helping them to get rid of u

Perhaps I should have stated my reasoning for not participating. For me, the level of data collected and stored in perpetuity by FB was not worth the free creeps on family and friends. Also, I think the entire concept fosters a false reality and perception of self and others, family and friends.

Now if FB wants to pay me for all that data they'll use to make money and target me with ads, maybe I'd consider it. Maybe.

You do realize that they track you anyway right? They were sued over it. Even if you don't have an account they still track you across the internet and make a ghost profile for you

And... what? So therefore I should just signup and consent to it anyways? No thanks

I don't have Facebook, Twitter or Instagram, and everyone thinks it's crazy, and bombards me to get it constantly. Mainly Instagram. And I'm in college btw...

i think it's crazy that some people still have it.

Am I outraged at the attack on freedom of speech? Yes I am.

That being said, maybe people will finally stop trusting one of the least truthworthy outlets on the planet to supply them with information that the majority of them don't even vet before they like and share.

A private company doesn't owe anyone free speech, per se.

And as it's been posted ad nauseum, free speech only protects you from persecution from the government. This is not a free speech issue, even if some legit accounts get caught in their dragnet

I'm surprised this is still a misunderstood concept.

Facebook owes no one a page. They can remove every one of them except for the ones about tweezers if they want to.

Free speech only means you won't get thrown in jail (of course there are exceptions, e.g. in cases of sedition) not that you've got a 'right' to say and do whatever you want on Facebook.

what if the government tried to censor a publication before or after anti-government whistleblowing was published? this would still be a free speech issue, despite the fact that no-one is being thrown in jail, no?

additionally, facebook and youtube are so ubiquitous and used by so many people that making a facebook post is akin to saying something out loud in a public place. to take away your platform is like forcing you out of the public square; it may not break the letter of the law, but it certainly breaks the spirit.

this is further reinforced by the fact that facebook's actions have been and certainly still are affected by the US government, and the fact that arrests have been made on people based on what they commented or posted on facebook when their communication did not entail or suggest any law-breaking.

The spirit of the law has nothing to do with private companies. You can’t just apply a “spirit of the law” to anything.

i just described my reasoning for applying it in this case. if your counterpoint is nothing more than, "you can't do that," then i suggest you reread what i already said.

I suggest your reasoning to apply “spirit of laws” to things that the law isn’t related to is misguided.

There is no spirit of the law that Facebook is breaking because the spirit of the law has nothing to do with private companies.

well, SOME laws certainly apply to companies, as you must be aware of. so the question is more WHICH laws apply to companies.

which is the exact question i responded to when i suggested that, since facebook is so ubiquitous that it is seen as a public service, it is perceived as breaking free speech laws. since it is technically a company, it is not literally breaking the law (i.e. the letter of the law). but, since it is censorship of a functionally public service and is likely assisted or controlled by the government, it has the same effect that the government would if it directly broke free speech rights, (i.e. the spirit of the law).

this is the same situation as superPACs and campaign contributions. the purpose of relevant laws is to limit the amount of money that private citizens can give to a campaign. someone maxing out their 2700 bucks and then giving millions to a superPAC doesn't technically break the law (the letter of the law), but it has the same effect as what the law was intended to prevent (the spirit of the law).

Facebook is not a public service or a public utility. Thus, there is no spirit of the law for them to ignore.

Ubiquity doesn’t make something a public service. Smart phones are not public services. Neither are laptops. Or Microsoft Office. Or LinkedIn.

Fuck you pussy

Lol. The biggest L ever taken right here.

Rule #10

again, i am not claiming that they are publically owned. i am claiming that they are such de facto, not de jure. facebook has such a monopoly insomuch that there is no comparable alternative. to function in normal life, facebook is often required to communicate.

if you said something politically disadvantageous to verizon over a verizon phone line and they (or the government told them to) discontinued your service, would you still say "well, it's not censorship because they're a private company"?

the purpose of free speech is to allow all viewpoints and opinions to be heard, even when it threatens or opposes larger power structures. when facebook removes things out of political motivation (especially if directed to by the government), it flies in the face of the purpose of free speech. that is why i consider it de facto censorship.

I pay for Verizon and can switch. Facebook is free to use and is voluntary. If I violate their terms, then that’s my fault.

what if verizon was the only major service provider? facebook is technically free, but it is required communication for many vocations, services and social circles. as such i consider it a de facto public service.

and besides, my original point still stands regardless of whether or not facebook is a de facto public service or not. the law is not always just. let's say that when the US first came into being, all people in the state were legally considered "public servants." to outlaw murder, the law stated: "public servants are not allowed to commit murder." 300 years later, the US decides to create a legal differentiation between public servants and private citizens.

if they changed nothing else, the murder law would no longer apply to people considered private citizens. under the law as written, private citizens would be allowed to murder, and yet it's pretty obvious that such a thing would not only be morally wrong, but would also be a misunderstanding of the purpose of the original murder law.

when free speech laws were first created, states were the primary power structures of the day. states were banned from censoring others not only because they were states, but because they represented the powerful against the weak; the purpose of free speech laws was to ensure that all viewpoints and arguments could be heard and discussed by the citizenry, even if they challenged the predominant power structure.

we now live in a world where the predominant power structures are corporations and big businesses, rather than the state itself. though free speech laws cannot be applied to these structures in court, if we were following the spirit or purpose of the original law, we could and would. i'm essentially saying the laws are outdated in multiple ways, this being the primary one.

SCOTUS disagrees with you.

so? lol. the supreme court has been embarrassingly wrong in the past.

That’s my reaction to your revisionist history about the first amendment.

i see. very constructive comments you're presenting here. i'm glad we can have such a meaningful discussion as two rational adults.

Yep, it was nice while it lasted.

They are private company unless Facebook becomes nationalized by the government they are allowed and they will continue to remove anything that they don't like on there

note that i never said they weren't a private company; this is something i'm fully aware of. i'm arguing that they are de facto a public communications service, i.e. so many people use it and it is so necessary for communication at present insomuch that it serves the exact same function that a public communication service (if one existed). would also serve.

Then we would need the government created public forum and order for something like that to happen

for something like what to happen?

A public forum with totally free speech.

well, personally i think the legal definition of free speech is outdated and should be applied to online interactions. if that's too restrictive on business for whatever reason, then i would support government ownership of the internet and the creation of public forums like what you suggested.

It is outdated. The founding fathers could never have envisioned an online public forum that was run by a private company. There would have to be an amendment or a change to apply to things that are in cyberspace as well as in real life.

oh yeah, i mean the very concept of the internet would be impossible to conceive of at that point. were they around today, i'm sure the law would look differently.

what if the government

Meaningless comparison. Facebook isn’t the government.

akin to saying something out loud in a public place

Nope.

the spirit

That’s not a thing.

arrests have been made on people based on what they commented or posted on Facebook when their communication did not entail or suggest any lawbreaking

And your source for this obvious bullshit is what?

I'm sure FB posts have been used as evidence in some cases, but this is just dumb(emphasis mine):

arrests have been made on people based on what they commented or posted on Facebook when their communication did not entail or suggest any lawbreaking

what if facebook and the government were part of the same power structure, or one had meaningful control over the other? it seems odd that facebook often censors things to favor US hegemony; do you think that's totally coincidental? or, do you think they don't want such things on their platform for reasons that are entirely their own? if this is true for the MSM, then i don't see why it wouldn't be true for facebook.

the spirit of the law is, in fact, a thing. have you not heard of the legal terms "de jure" and "de facto"? i'm arguing that facebook censoring could be considered to have the same effect that government censorship would have, and for the same purpose. because it is often in the best interests of large power structures, including the US state, it is de facto censorship.

as far as it not being the same as saying something publically, that's simply a difference of opinion. again, facebook is not de jure a public communications service, i'm arguing that it is de facto.

i'll look for my source when i'm not on mobile and at work.

what if

But they’re not though?

favor US hegemony

Lol wut.

de jure and de facto

Which apply to the law in theory, not in practical application. You can’t reinterpret the first amendment to justify restricting the power of a company to control its platform.

it is de facto

No, it really isn’t.

You can’t reinterpret the first amendment to justify restricting the power of a company to control its platform.

this is clear evidence that you don't understand my argument whatsoever. i am not suggesting the first amendment should be reinterpreted in a way that would be unconstitutional. i am suggesting that the constitution be amended to apply the concept of free speech to institutions other than the government.

apart from that, all you did was say "u r rong" and be a huge prick. if you can't converse with me in good faith, i really have no reason to engage with you.

be amended to apply the concept of free speech to institutions other than the government

That’s inherently restrictive of the free speech of individuals. You can’t have it both ways.

We're really in trouble if we're looking to multi-billion dollar companies to curate our principles for us.

The original discussion was whether Facebook owes you a place for your free speech. Bottom line, they do not.

morally

Lol no.

ethics and principles

Aw, that’s adorable.

Holy God, people are looking for Facebook to be moral? FML

no one expects facebook to be moral out of the kindness of their own hearts. i think free speech laws should be amended in order to apply to services like facebook, to which they would then have to (in theory) comply with.

Ok that's your stance, what are you going to do when they keep right on doing what they've been doing?

You haven't offered any 'moral' alternative social networks in this entire thread.

I see your direction now. Gab is white supremacists and minds is endorsed by breitbart.

This discussion no longer has merit, I'm disengaging

Take your click bait bullshit elsewhere, no one here bought your crocodile tears

Principles like being pro-clickbait? Principles like supporting amoral creeps like you who trick desperate cancer patients into going off their treatment and buying bullshit herbal pills instead? Oh my, you are such a martyr. Personally I'd love it of you really did launch this platform of yours just so we could quarantine fraudulent bullshit to one corner of the internet.

Facebook isn't a media. The internet is. As long as you're allowed to create your own web page and say whatever you want on it then this declaration has been met.

If you really want that free speech on Facebook you're going to have to nationalize it otherwise they're going to continue to do this

It should be classified as a public utility and regulated as such.

lmfao

Scary that you want to give the US government more power.

It’s not tricky at all. The government shouldn’t regulate Facebook. Period.

The US government is filled with the people that us as a population decide to vote in there. You should be mad at your fellow countrymen for putting in those moronic people or those traitorous dick bags in office

They could be the most righteous folks and I still wouldn’t want the government dictating what Facebook can and cannot display.

Stop trying to pit me against my neighbors.

Your neighbors are the ones that elected these people that are put in the government that make all these horrible decisions that you don't like

I guess my goal isn’t to sow discontent amongst my fellow neighbors.

The reason those people are in the government is because your neighbors decided that they like them over somebody else and voted for them.

You literally talked shit to some guy on the internet over semantics and when I called you out for it you talked more shit. Fuck you pussy.

You took an easy opportunity to make fun of someone for something only a neckbeard would care about. Quit claiming this moral high ground. Paging r/quityourbullshit we've got a pathological liar over here.

Also, how the fuck do you think those in government got there? We're they magicked into it? No your neighbors voted for the person that best represents their interests. If their interest is fascism I don't want them as my neighbors.

No, it's not a free speech issue. You have a human right to free speach, but you don't have those rights when you agreed to the TOS to use what Facebook has created. It appears you and 'friends' put most of your eggs in someone elses basket and they threw them out. Loopholes are great till they get closed.

What about the principles of being honest and not spreading misinformation? Or is free speech the only principle you have?

Protecting the free speech of their users isn't vital nor even a right you have on their website. They do and should have the right to silence you on their property.

It seems they have taken the approach that on a macro level, honesty and not spreading misinformation is more important than your right to post. Since they own the space, they get to determine what is vital to them.

They have principles - you agreed to those principles when you agreed to the TOS. Now that you are experiencing the consequences of your own misguided social beliefs and ignorance of those incorporated principles (ones that you really didn't really read and understand anyway) you are angry at them; They took your golden goose away. You should be angry at yourself for being so shortsighted and nieve, not at Facebook.

You and yours got valuable business lesson from a successful business - Ride the coattails of others and you will, eventually, fall off.

If they are so unethical why did you and your friends run your clickbait business stuff through them

The problem isn't Facebook. The problem is your opinion of what you think Facebook should be.

All the best creating your new social media platform.

Your rights don't apply on the internet.

a) that's not legally binding and b) even if they were, not every country is in the UN

Yes it does

As a private company with billions of users it DOES owe everyone free speech

And that's that might not be legally enforceable yet but there's nothing stopping Congress from passing a law for it

It's just Facebook technically is legally allowed to ban Pages Congress is also legally allowed to pass a law against it it

Because it’s big it necessarily has to provide free speech? How does that work?

there’s nothing stopping Congress

Except that pesky first amendment.

Crypt0 also had his group and all its moderators accounts suspended, they 96k followers

U/kpettit24

lower case man like this u/_evelyn24

u rock

Is it Facebook itself or individuals in that company with different points of view?

If those individuals are removing pages in their capacity as Facebook employees, it's Facebook.

Regardless I'm glad these journalistic con men are losing a platform with wide reach. Go join the sandwich board people downtown saying the apocalypse is coming.

I'm surprised that anyone here still uses Facebook. So glad to purge it from my life.

I'm right there with you.

2 1/2 years clean here.

7 years clean. After I found out what Zuckerberg said about people that trusted him being "dumb fucks", goodbye Facebook.

Yeah.. I can't even remember when I deleted mine. I think back in 2011 or 2012.

I only use it to keep up with old military friends, because I hate talking on the phone. I hated it even before the internet.

It’s pretty useful

I'm in University and a lot of group projects, volunteer groups, pages to sell your old textbooks, etc. are all on Facebook. Plus it's a way for your classmates to communicate with you if you're not close friends and don't exchange phone numbers.

Craigslist, ebay, GroupMe.

Seeing as how most students don't use those websites and most are on Facebook looking for books, those websites are pointless if you're trying to increase your chances of selling your books

dude just rent textbooks from chegg

or lib.gen

it only takes a few people to move away from those groups and others will follow. you shouldn't be part of the problem.

It's not really realistic. For another type of social media or website platform to work, a majority of people would have to move at the same time and right now, most people are staying put on FB because there's no better alternative. By the time a new website has launched and people start going there, I'll be out of school.

yes, but it only takes one or two people to leave a group and their friends will soon find another way to contact them.

Yes, with you too. FB is toxic.

Left a few months ago. Glad to have a few more hours a day to myself instead of mindless scrolling!

https://deletefacebook.com

Deleted mine last month permanently. Never been stress freer

Nikola Tesla fans?!? Dah fuk, hes been dead for years and they still trying to bury him.

really activates them almonds

What if FB stood up to the federal gov surveillance state commands, and were punished with Russia data leaks congressional hearings?

Now they have to follow the rules. The ones Donna Brazile followed.

Or we go deeper than that and say it’s all a smoke and mirror show, a rouse. It’s all planned, and FB serves loyalty as the source of the deep state’s latest hard-on project (obsessed with documenting a person’s life and dissecting their soul).

One fact that is not a conspiracy: FB serves as the backbone of the American stock market and provides one of the few titanic pillars of digital (note: speculative) wealth which America can save itself from its near-suicidal destruction of its own manufacturing sector. FB is a vital national interest, and the failure of the company would be a fucking ridiculous detriment to the stock market, and therefore (maybe) the economy.

Backbone of stock market, vital national interest and a derp state conspiracy all in one

Saw an advertising billboard for Facebook in London yesterday that said:

"Facebook - Fake News Is Not Our Friend"

There must be some sort of 'initiative' afoot for them to attempt to sort out their public image - which is a mess.

You're right, i've seen the commercial version of this on tv, they play the angle that they werent being sketchy and they were equally as unassuming during the rise of 'fake news' as john q. citizen and theyre gonna put a stop to it!

Never apologizing for selling info

They played it 5 times before a movie we went to last week. People were snarky laughing at it.

Yep. TV commercials here across the pond here about gaining trust back...

Well facebook is dying. I beileve we will see a new massive social media network start up sooner or later.

The worst part for a lot of people is that when Facebook dies, they will sell all of the personal information they have collected to the lowest bidder. Everything about everyone will be up for sale.

Diaspora

Peertube

Peer networking sites will be the revolutionary change.

I bet the CIA is already working on it.

Facebook is dying except their user numbers continue to grow.

Zionist Zuckerberg what do you expect? After the cambrdige scandal I deleted my facebook.

Side note--Anything that is free YOU or YOUR INFORMATION is the product they sell. Make sure any info you give them is all bullshit like my facebook profile was.

using faceberg

there's your problem

All those 84 sites were owned by your friends? Don't you mean co-workers?

Honestly I don't empathise at all with clickbaiters losing their jobs pushing clickbait. A lot of those pages openly endorse refusing medication in favour of spiritualism, which is directly harmful.

All those 84 sites were owned by your friends? Don't you mean co-workers?

Never been on Facebook? When people follow each other they are Facebook friends.

Big difference between "Facebook friend" and actual friend though.

Exactly, or do you think someone can have 84 real friends?

Who all just happens to work in the clickbait industry? Of course they can, but that obviously means that OP is a clickbaiter himself, worried about his income and not anything else.

The point is there isn't a great reason for them to be taken down.

I think the reason is because Facebook found that it’s users don’t want to be pummeled with clickbait spam and forwards from grandma and these pages and organizations didn’t want to play by those rules and continued spammy posts begging for likes and shares.

All I got from this is a tacit admission you work in the clickbait industry.

Sounds like an issue for you, not other people.

You said in your previous post that it's not the responsibility of the page whether what it pushes is fake or real facts, but instead that judging that falls on the personal judgement of the consumer. It's exactly that attitude which has created the public outrage at fake news, and why Facebook is acting on it. The "industry" dug its own grave.

You're just sad you lost a place to peddle your fake ass crystal bullshit and now it's harder to bilk gullible people.

Facebook hasn't been about reconnecting with old friends or making new ones for a long time. That was a million dollar idea. Why do that when there are billions upon billions to be made harvesting, correlating and selling data?

We're all getting played but your naivete is like asking to be exploited.

Its more about freedom to do what you want.

If a company like facebook is deleting the pages the outrage is because people are not having enough alternatives with such a strong base( user base ), therefore they cannot be ok with the fact that their voices are repressed.

It's high time to move on to other social platform , where this sort of shit doesn't happen. But isers are unwillong to goto. They will later on accept the repression , kindda like straight from 1984.

No one has ever been allowed to do whatever they want on Facebook.

The constitution containing your rights isn't written by the UN or the US, but the "terms of agreement" you accept when you register on that site. If you don't like it, leave Facebook.

You already have the freedom to do what you want. You just don't have the freedom to make others do what you want. And that's a good thing.

No it isn't. You guys are fucking hilarious.

You guys could all hang out on that goop website. Probably has all the products and articles that speaks to your enlightened minds.

Can't handle the free market at work?

Someone needs to start a social media where there's actual freedom. and dont tell me reddit is the place for that, because power hungry mods take away everyone's freedom.

How are you going to pay for server time. If people don't pay for the service some one has to. You think facebook servers run on freedom or the programmers are paid in likes? Social media is not a public service, its a business and if the users are not willing to pay a subscription then the users will be the product.

How does any website pay for servers? Like you said, by people who would pay a subscription for a website that has more freedom, which you could easily argue that there's a market for.

No there isn’t. That’s why there isn’t such a website. People won’t wven pay for produced content let alone for social media.

Yes, there is. We are just too lazy to make that website.

There are plenty of tech savvy people on this reddit yet no one does it...

true, and to what u said about no one paying for social media, reddit reaches its goal for gold almost everyday..

They still rely on add income, hence accountable to advertisers. Also 20 millions unique users monthly creates a lot of reddit gold purchases... but it’s a hard sell initially and you need a critical mass.

Wow look at these shills downvoting you out of site. -75 for complaining about Facebook on a conspiracy sub. Unreal

Simply sharing information (true or false) does not cause direct harm. It may indirectly cause harm if it's false/harmful and the reader follows the instructions but the choice is still up to the reader. It's called personal responsibility.

No, that's called false salesmanship because the people spreading that information makes money by people believing it and sharing it.

It's the personal responsibility of the pushers to accept that the world isn't obliged to respect their opinions and false facts.

I was on Facebook when it was invites-only and didn't have any of this crap, which is one of the reasons why the site is shit. It went from being about socialising to sharing information made by people who, like OP says, has it as their livelihood.

https://youtu.be/3PbdyJ_ybSI

All Facebook is saying is go spread your lies somewhere else. They have no obligaion to provide a platform for clickbait, hate speech, fake news, and engagement bait. Nobody is saying these assholes cant go make some crappy wordpress website and sell their snake oil. Facebook is saying they cant do it on their website.

I find your argument humerous and quite frankly stupid that by Facebook getting rid of all the shitty things about it, it is the end of the platform.

false salesmanship

We can use the legal term:

Fraud.

fake news companies like the onion

That’s satire.

not be allowed to make money

The onion is intended for satire. It’s deliberately false for entertainment and political commentary. The pages you listed are deliberately false because they want to sell snake oil bullshit.

the end of Facebook

Doom and gloom that’s embarrassingly far from being true.

end of free speech for anyone who still uses the platform

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Facebook is a private company and they're not obliged to provide you with your preferred fake news to sooth you.

People don't like seeing clockbait-y, fakenews bullshit in their feed. The more I see the less I like it. That leads to me using Facebook less. So while you are profiting you are harming Facebook's value and are not "harmless". Facebook is protecting shareholder value, and owes you and your friends nothing. Freedom of speech doesn't come into play at all in this discussion, that's for government not corporations. Facebook doesn't like your content and is telling you to get off their lawn. You've been riding their coattails and when they put a stop to it you are acting all entitled and got what you deserve.

You got me, I mistranslated "falsk marknadsföring".

The onion doesn't pretend to be real, it's pure comedy and satire. Big difference.

A couple centuries ago "entrepreneurs" would go town to town peddling tonics and miracle cures. They preyed on the hopeless and ignorant but they never stayed long in one place for fear of getting strung up on a tree.

I love your answer in theory and all things being equal in a just world it would work fine. I don't know where and who draws the line just that those things are dangerous and running them out is no longer an option.

I left Facebook because of the shit people like you keep pushing through it! This isn't the end of FB, this is perhaps the first time they're properly flushing their toilet of the shit that makes it horrible.

If they get rid of this crap I might come back!

Seriously "false salesmanship"? http://lmgtfy.com/?q=false+salesmanship

false salesmanship

We've got to stop making up new words when the old ones are perfectly adequate. It's a con, flimflam, modern day snake oil.

Yellow journalism is directly harmful to society.

Yellow journalism DIRECTLY contributes to ignorance. Ignorance is a bane on any society. Less informed then continue to pass on that ignorance to others. It is a direct path from an ignorant statement presented as fact to a larger group of people believe that ignorant statement. Then those people sharing that ignorance VOTE in ignorance, making that ignorance POLICY.

Gonna get semantic on direct vs. indirect? Spreading ignorance is direct harm of society.

Ignorance is a bane on any society. Less informed then continue to pass on that ignorance to others. It is a direct path from an ignorant statement presented as fact to a larger group of people believe that ignorant statement. Then those people sharing that ignorance VOTE in ignorance...

...and next thing you know Donald Trump is the President of the United States.

I believe hope got him elected, just like it got Obama elected. The similarity is that the people who got them into office all believed they were voting for *real change." I'm not so sure it was ignorance rather than naivety.

Ignorance is when those same people refuse to see the harmful actions of Trump, just like those of us who ignored Obama lying about the ACA, GITMO, the drone program, getting out of the ME. It's willful ignorance.

Funny thing I've notice throughout my life. Calling someone ignorant (something you can always fix) pisses people off way more than calling them stupid (something you cannot fix).

Funny thing I've notice throughout my life. Calling someone ignorant (something you can always fix) pisses people off way more than calling them stupid (something you cannot fix).

There are a lot of people who believe "ignorant" is a fancy word for stupid. They get super pissed because in their minds they are being called stupid in an elitist way.

how misinformation

FTFY.

Spreading lies, especially snake oil health claims, get people sick or killed.

It's actually disinformation! I learned that the other day.

I’m pretty sure misinformation is still correct.

Misinformation is unintentionally false information, like just a mistake with no actual intent to lie.

Disinformation is when it is known to be false and spread as the truth.

Disinformation is intentionally false or inaccurate information that is spread deliberately. It is an act of deception and false statements to convince someone of untruth. Disinformation should not be confused with misinformation, information that is unintentionally false. ...Misinformation means incorrect information.

Fair enough. Would you say that all of them are disinformation, rather than just being misinformed and spreading it?

I'd say the spammers who post the OC are disinformation, and the people who get fooled and spread it are the misinformation.

It can also be deadly, "remember the Maine! "

Yeah... I don't think I'm excited these are the pages removed but I thought the same exact thing.

My most active FB friends dont have that many groups, nobody does

So when is Facebook going to delete Democrat fake news Pages? Like occupy Democrats with chez's 0% truthful rating from PolitiFact PolitiFact

Great question. Wtf are you asking me for lol?

0% truthful rating from PolitiFact PolitiFact

The Politifact scorecard for this statement: Mostly False

How much do they pay u to lie?

ALL democrats lie

And heres the proof from Politifact

Do you get all your facts from memes?

It's literally a screenshot you inbred

With big bold lettering so you know what you're Goebbels wants you to think.

Rule #10

All these companies fighting for a space on my timeline. So much shit like that^ ends up on my phone. It wastes thousands of hours of peoples time. Like if I didn't ask for it, get the fuck off on screen. Thats the fucking crime against humanity.

Knowing shitty facebook pages like those^{^} are getting wiped brings joy to my heart. And knowing the owners cared about them and lost something valuable (like my time), brings even more joy.

P.S people with health problems should not take health advice from fucking Facebook. People spend their entire lives researching these things so you don't have to. It is an insult to take advice from some dick making a viral video than seek their support.

Don't be dumb.

You’re so right. People with health problems should just buy whatever big pharma is currently selling and go away quietly when their jaw falls off.

No, I just walk into the NHS, they treat me for free and I thank them on the way out.

With my jaw on and injury treated professionally.

You're equating two separate things: peer reviewed research and the pharmaceutical industry. Alternative and traditional medicine are great if they work. A couple years ago a woman won a Nobel Prize for scientifically proving the effectiveness a treatment in Chinese traditional medicine. Anyone who peddling health advice that gets offended when you ask for hard data is selling snake oil.

No, I’m not equating them at all. Most “natural” or alternative treatment options aren’t able to have a patent; therefore, no single person is usually making millions off of them. Because such methods aren’t cash cows, no one can afford to fund the studies the pharmaceutical industry loves to demand to “prove” a treatment works. It’s their favorite way to shut down alternative treatments. Are we not a free society? I value both allopathic and alternative treatment methods and I enjoy having a choice and information on all fronts. Shutting down informative Facebook pages is a form of censorship I cannot get behind.

You're spot on in regard to money. Pharmaceutical companies run the FDA who in turn skews the process of clinical studies heavily in their favor. You've still got to have more than just anecdotal accounts. There's a difference between an open mind and blind faith. Fruit was never going to cure Steve Jobs's cancer.

But who decides which is which? It’s a slippery slope with a LOT of money in the wings. A few years ago I distinctly remember people calling immunotherapy “quack” medicine (likely mostly by people receiving some funding by pharma) and now because a few independent researchers stuck it out and well known politicians and celebrities used it with success, it’s now becoming more mainstream. I’d rather live in a society where people are free to use whatever medical treatment option they choose than to be limited to whatever pharma decides is best, all I’m saying. If you think food as treatment is wacky that’s fine but if some people choose to go that route that’s fine with me too.

You're way off base with immunotherapy. The term is way to too broad. The research you're talking about is regarding cellular immunotherapy. It's very promising and and already works with some cancers. The guy credited with it's discovery used it on his dog a couple years back. The research was done at the university level and began as "pure science". It's financed in the most part by taxpayers through national institutes of health grants. The day to day grunt work is done by grad and doc students. Cellular immunotherapy is bleeding edge and all the patents are held by either scientists or universities. I'm not even going to try to explain how it works, you want to talk to my sister. It's not in the hands of the pharmaceutical industry... yet.

Well, if homeopathy is real, the more bullshit clickbait pseudohealth pages you pull out of FaceBook, the better the rest work, right? Efficiency through distallation, or something like that?

Funny how they're so quickly deleting these Facebook pages yet when a regular user wants to delete their own page Facebook acts like they're losing a damned family member. Guess that precious data's worth that much.

Facebook actually has a feature where they curate your pages and information once you die and make your main page like a memorial. You can also designate a family member or friend as someone who will look after your page and info once you've died. You can find it somewhere in account settings.

I'm not completely sure on this one as I've deleted my account months ago, but I think once you sign up for the memorial feature, there's no way to opt out. I may be wrong about that though.

Absolutely fucking creepy though.

Yeah, its true. I guy from my high school died a few years ago (not sure how, I didn’t really know him) and now his FB profile is like a memorial page. I think it’s quite disturbing, and disrespectful to the deceased.

I agree, it is disrespectful.

I specifically meant that I wasn't sure about the opting out of said feature though, just to clarify.

Oh I see now, I re-read your comment.

I think immediate relatives can jump through 100 hoops and have it deleted

My last will is: https://deletefacebook.com

https://deletefacebook.com

You can actually now chose to permanently delete it

I like that you wrote the title!!! exactly how all these pages write their FB posts!!!

Hyperbole = "Crime against humanity."

So you have nothing to say about the point of the post huh? That forum sliding though

When you post to Reddit the way FB posts are made, you're gonna have a bad time.

Do we have any proof they aren't breaking Facebook ToS?

life-saving information

Lol no. That’s not an over exaggeration, it’s a lie.

Holy shit. They haven’t saved countless lives. They’ve saved maybe a couple hundred. Everyone else they helped probably died because they started taking natural cures. You ever wonder why you only hear the positive about natural medicines, and never the negatives? The people who experience the negative far outnumbers the people who experience the positive.

Just wanna say, keep doing what you are doing. Stay the course. Good work.

The downvotes are strong on this post. Stay the course friend.

I don't understand what people are complaining about. Between FaceBook and YouTube, you guys sound entitled to whatever you want, whenever you want because that's what you once had.

Get over it. These are FREE site that you are just a guest in. They don't owe you anything.

Although the internet changed the world exponentially (mostly for the good), social media has become the bane of society!!

The Generation X and Millennials are way too attached, dependent to electronic superficiality and.....with this with righteous indignation attitude to boot.

We have alternatives , the only thing is people are not shifting to better ones , and cry in the meantime that facebook represses them amd invade privacy.

Well , use another thing then.

Peer to peer social networking sites are the next thing.

Hopefully we see a new revolution.

This

U think youre entitled to free elections?

No

The govt is its own entity with its own people and can do what it wants

Dont like it?

Use a different govt

Noones stopping u

If enough people did that then the free-market of governments would sort the problem out itself

Holyshit how do you not understand that Facebook is a private company on the internet they are not the government they can take down whatever stupid thing that they want because they are a private company. If Facebook was a government entity they would not be able to do anything that they're doing right now

I am not referring to free speech. I am talking about a free venue.

FaceBook could be charging you a fee!!! But they don't. And if they were, we'd be having a different conversation.

Stop this insanity. Twitter, FaceBook, YouTube, Snapchap and all those other FREE platforms can do whatever they want whenever they want to. Just like when someone comes to YOUR house, YOU call the shots. Not them (even though they have 'free speech')

Ugh!

Free speech is not the same as a free platform.

people are sick and tired

You’re really self deluded.

You're fucking stupid. Facebook isn't operated by a government.

Free speech is a fundamental human right

You are also responsible for whatever comes out of your mouth.

Anyways you selling snake oil shit is freedom of speech. It is fraud.

I can't believe you're being down voted for advocating the principle of free speech.

Probably because they aren’t. They’re bullshitting.

By them deleting certain information and keeping others, they have thrown their hat into the manipulate my thoughts category. Maybe you're fine with that.

Go experience life outside the internet!! Go rediscover nature!

Nope.

They've also been in the "manipulate my thoughts" territory. Always. If you're just finding out now because some alternative medicine pages got purged, you haven't been paying attention.

Facebook doesn't owe you free speech or a platform. Nor should you or anyone else be able to manipulate other people's thoughts through Facebook.

You whine about Facebook's control over people only because you would rather control them yourself. Snake oil salesman.

You're right. They don't owe me anything. But I can also express how I don't like something they are doing.

You're late to the party and you're whining about something that is no surprise to any adult. Can't imagine why people here are laughing at you.

This

U think youre entitled to free elections?

No

The govt is its own entity with its own people and can do what it wants

Dont like it?

Use a different govt

Noones stopping u

If enough people did that then the free-market of governments would sort the problem out itself

Private companies don't owe you a platform, especially not free of charge.

Go for it. I won't use it, but you're more than welcome to try.

Good luck!

Honestly, I would pay $20 a month to use a censorship and bot free platform.

Godaddy.com

Okay and you in a few other people who would also pay that can go hang out there. Actually there's a bunch of free ones you can use with other radicals who feel the same way way

Voat.com

Gab.ai

Stormfront

All of those are censorship free hubs for the few people radical enough to isolate themselves on amother platform

Try posting something that goes against the majority on those websites and see how quickly they get censored or removed.

Do it then! That is the obvious step, not crying on Reddit asking everyone to agree that Facebook is so mean.

He won't. Because he knows it's not really possible

He knows that to do something like that you need billions or trillions of dollars and Investments massive marketing and developer teams and even then there's no incentive for people to leave fb

But he worships his corporate Masters so he can't actually advocate for any kind of regulation

This is always said but nothing ever happens

It's been said for decades and it never happens

I mean there's hundreds or thousands of alternative social media but they never take off.

There's always someone who tries to create an alternative to Facebook thinking that the promise of no censorship is going to convince all the billions of people on Facebook to transfer over

Usually it convinces a few radicals but eventually they get bored because the only people they get to talk to ar actual Nazis and racists

if you got moneys to spare on brain power, equipment (considering that AWS can equally purge you), then go for it.

You could do that before. Make a website.

Facebook is a public company.

Only insomuch as their stock is traded publicly but that has no bearing on their policies or what they owe to the user base.

That doesn't mean what you think it does.

Then nationalize them, and set up some type of civilian civilian/non-political oversight. They serve too vital a role for collective discourse to be controlled by private, profit-seeking companies (after all, didn't Russia use FB to decide the presidential election... /s).

Um, why? They aren't a vital service.

I didn't say the service they offer is vital (like food, shelter, etc.), I said it's to vital for public discourse. The way I see it, non-manipulated, transparent public discourse is essential for a functional democracy.

Our anti-trust laws are probably more than adequate basis for the action of nationalization. The real impediment is political will.

No don't you see? It's only bad if a government does it!

If the government says you can't do something then it's tyranny but if Corporation prevents you from doing something that's freedom

Ha, I'm actually not entirely comfortable with the government policing the internet. But after witnessing the real impact of shady-ass superpacs with their brigades of gaslighting, it's pretty clear that something needs to be done.

At least in theory, the government is accountable to the people. A corporation's only directive is to increase profits for shareholders.

This

If I had to choose between one of them at always choose the government because at least people can vote on the government. No one gets to vote on the corporations

It is absolutely not vital to the public discourse.

So how did public discourse exist before the internet?

Churches, civic-involvement organizations, or simply talking face-to-face. But here's my question - do you see anyone who came of age over the past 20 years (millennials, Gen Z) adopting any of these unless the internet suddenly disappears? Humans are lazy, and online communication is the path of least resistance.

No one has an obligation to hear out shitty ideas or opinions for its own sake. "Hurr humans are lazy" no, the internet just let's us block terrible people. On the public bus, I can't mute the racist asshole loudly ranting how everyone else is to blame. Online, I can. How is that in any way bad?

My point was that in the current ecosystem posts/information/stories/etc. are promoted not based on their merits, but based on the monetary value they can create for private parties. Not only that, promotion is often done secretly in a fashion that tricks users into believing something is widely supported (via purchased "likes"). It's gas-lighting, pure and simple.

Your ability to filter information that offends you is a side issue. This doesn't bother me as much, but I also find it a problem - we insulate ourselves from all ideas and people that/who are not like us. This is why everyone on the left was so certain that HRC was going to win the election.

Because most of us overestimated the intelligence of our neighbors.

Private companies don't owe you free speech, especially in return for watching their ads.

This is such a shortsighted view regarding Facebook.

In terms of reach Facebook is one of the world's biggest news providers, equivalent to something like CNN. Facebook started purging pages in the lead up to the 2016 election, removing right and leftwing pages without explanation and labelling certain stories "fake" without revealing their algorithm or sorting mechanism. It's well established that Facebook is comfortable sharing data with security agencies and that the site is a haven for atroturfing and other brain jobs like that.

Saying Facebook doesn't owe you anything is like saying "who cares if CNN is covering up a story or is shilling for the Iraq war, it's a private company they can report on what they want!"

On r/conspiracy no less, whewwww

The truth is immutable. This just shows the desperation of those who wish to maintain their diminishing systems of control. The tide is changing. Facebook is dead.

Which is why it keeps growing?

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/facebook-quit-young-people-social-media-snapchat-instagram-emarketer-a8206486.html

Thank you u/unhiddenhand for posting a source for my claim that FB continues to grow.

“The site’s overall user base continues to grow, however, thanks to its increasing popularity among older people.”

Oh, I'm sorry. You are correct.

Look at all those health and wellness pages!

That spout non sensical bullshit like Fruits cures cancer?

How about sleeping with an onion to detox? That can't be fake!

Remember that one guy who said you should wash your hands before surgery? What an idiot? Outside the status quo, he was. Should have stayed their.

Or that other person who believed in germs. Such a tool.

No they actually listened to him, and it has been standard practice for a long time. Nice try with the bullshit though, got some good anti-vax jpgs I can post on twitter?

Really. He was listened to immediately?

I have the real info! The first doctor to campaign for cleanliness in hospitals was not only shunned by other medical professionals, but ended up in an insane asylum.

Prior to the 19th century, handwashing primarily existed in the context of religious ceremonies and practices. It plays a role in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, and Buddhism in some form or another. But washing up to stop the spread of disease wasn't really a thing for most of history. People weren't aware of germs, so instead of microbes, they blamed illness on everything from demons to bad air.

Then, in 1846, a Hungarian doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis made a breakthrough observation. He noticed that women giving birth with the help of midwives were less likely to die than those treated by doctors. He determined that because doctors were also performing autopsies on victims of puerperal fever (a bacterial infection also known as childbed fever), they were somehow spreading the disease to their other patients. Semmelweis started promoting handwashing and instrument sterilization in his clinic, and the spread of puerperal fever dropped as a result.

Despite the evidence to support his theory, his peers in the medical community weren't keen on the idea of blaming patient deaths on doctors. Partly due to his commitment to the controversial theory, Semmelweis was shunned from his field. He suffered a mental breakdown and ended up in a mental hospital, where he died a few weeks later.

I wonder how many times this has happened the the current medical field.

People know better than to step out of line with their “wild ideas” but you make an interesting point. I’m imagining some poor guy getting gaslit and losing his job after finding something a little less cost effective (for business) than half measures and side effect laden pharma. Whereas the guy who invented the lobotomy got free reign to try and turn it into a Ford style assembly line process...

On people who couldn't defend themselves none the less

Bud, that’s not really how logic works.

I showed a source that showed he wasn't accepted. Someone claimed he was. So I believe that logic works with my legitimate sourced claim being the truth until proven otherwise.

No. You and I both know that the illogic I was referring to is your insane comparison of a guy from the 1800s suggesting handwashing, to modern bullshit quackery.

What modern day quackery would you consider is like the handwashing story. Because if anything, history shows that medicine mock people who challenge the status quo, even if they are right.

You replied to the comment about sleeping with an onion to detox.

Let’s start with that.

We as a species didn't know shit about anything in the 1800's. Now we've cured diseases, gone to the moon and are on our way to altering our own genetic code. I trust our scientists now.

Did we really go to the moon though?

I think yes we did. Just the footage was faked because of our moon base.

Idk depends on the scientists. I've learned science is easy to buy and fake results in the name of money and corporation. Yet IT has helped us in many ways.

I'm just on the fence

Just because corporations have made a few bullshit studies to further their companies doesn't mean you should just disregard science and all of its benefits to suit your needs.

Thats why i said it depends on the scientists. I mean someone that can be bought out isn't exactly trustworthy.

I will disregard a study but not science in a whole. There's a difference. Like I said I'm on the fence because i cant exactly test their studies at home can I? Science has given us and helped out a ton like I said before.

Also it's been more than just a "few" studies they have faked. Its not like it's a new idea to fake results and lie.

Really. He was listened to immediately?

No, but nobody said immediately.

Please google Ignatz Semmelweiss.

You’re incorrect but still got a bunch of upvotes. Every join in on the bandwagon.

Because sleeping with slices of potato taped to your feet is totally the same as washing your hands. Are you fucking retarded?

What are the studies and what have they shown?

Maybe if you pulled your head out of your ass for a second you'd realize that homeopathy is completely debunked. We understand way more about medicine than we did before the importance of hand washing was understood. Now that we have a solid understanding of medicine we can, in fact, say that taping potatoes to your feet to suck toxins from you is fucking retarded.

Homeopathy is fishy in my understanding too. But a lot of these natural treatments are not homeopathy. Taping potatoes to your feet to suck toxins is not homeopathy. Sounds to me like you should learn what homeopathy is.

Many of our medical advancements were "fucking retarded" in their day.

We also have much more knowledge and better technology today, so we can quickly debunk that nonsense.

Have you ever heard of this thing called "logical fallacy?" No? I didn't think so.

I have. And you just committed one.

lol, fine. I used an ad hominem attack. How could I not when you compare apples to rabbits?

Your argument is that the proponent of hand-washing has something in common with someone saying that sleeping with an onion under your pillow will "pull" toxins from your body.

There was always evidence that hand-washing prevented illness. There is only "evidence" that onions pull toxins in that they change color. That is disproven. The only things that detoxify you are your liver and kidneys. So maintaining the health of those organs is the only way to improve detoxification in your body. Those organs need proper nutrition and lots of water to function properly. This is science. "Detoxing" is bullshit.

Hand-washing on the other hand is science and not bullshit. There's no scientist out there saying onions can detox you. Only mommy bloggers with more time than sense.

My point is that historically, the medical establishment has not generally been welcoming to changes int he status quo.

I have to agree. Science is as much of a religion as any religion.

Surely you can appreciate the difference between hand washing and sleeping with a fucking onion. We didn't know about bacteria, and hand washing was the beginning of understanding how to mitigate their effects. What unknown process is going on when you sleep with an onion to "detox"? Hazard a guess. Don't worry, I'll wait.

I'm not the one who proposed it. Don't know. Don't do it.

Then why did you say what you did to the onion comment? You just supported the idea that advancements like hand washing wouldn't have happened if we all stayed with the status quo. You used sleeping with an onion to detox as the platform to make that point. The fact that you could even make that reply to my comment says enough. As I said, what is the mechanism at work? That's how medicine works. If you don't have an idea or if you can't demonstrate effects, no one busy into it. Obviously hand washing was demonstrably better. There were also people who would drain your blood with leeches at the time to rebalance their fluids. Should we give that side of medicine a try again because it's against the status quo? That's how all advances in medicine work, you make an educated guess first and then try it out. If you can't explain why an onion might help do the job if your organs (detoxification) then you shouldn't defend maintaining that bullshit as an option.

I understand the stupid sentiment: some good ideas get ignored when sticking to the status quo. You used the dumbest possible example to badly make your point. You just come off looking like you'd be willing to try anything anyone claims because it's not mainstream. And since all doctors are obviously liars, so anything mainstream is fake news and anything not mainstream is medically beneficial.

Hey speaking of, I heard rubbing dog shit on your face is a great new exfoliant and does just as good of a job as store bought products. Makes you look 15 years younger, give it a shot! Don't waste your money with the mainstream methods!

What is the mechanism at work ?

Sulfur

Can you expand on that a little? What about sulfur?

Onions have long been put in houses to ward off sickness. Look up onions absorbing airborn viruses. Ill wait

Lol!! And leeches were used for a long time to balance fluids! Doesn't make it legitimate medically beneficial. Which is exactly why I asked about the mechanism at play. What part of an onion would absorb a virus that humans can get, and successfully hold on to them for disposal? Is it the skin? The flesh? Why? What's happening when an onion absorbs a virus? I'm not doing the research for you. The burden of proof is on you. I'm saying I don't buy it. Make a better point than "people have been doing it for years". Not good enough.

US6340483Antiviral composition derived from allium CEPA and therapeutic use thereof

2000-08-03

This isn't proof of anything. You sent me a pattent. This is the ability of someone to make money off of selling dehydrated onions to HIV positive people and sue others who try to do so. This pattent allows them to stake out this corner of the market. That is all.

Again, this is proof that people use garlic/onions with the claim that it has these effects. Explain the actual mechanism, show a study where the effects are shown and then we're talking. There are millions of snake oil pattents. Every other idiot on dragons den has a pattent for their invention. Doesn't make them all legitimate.

Leeches are still used in the medical industry when necessary.

But not for the use of rebalancing your fluids. They also use maggots in some places as maggots only eat necrotuc tissue. The reasoning is what makes the difference.

Do you also have Garlic around your house to fend off vampires?

Whats with trolls who havent learned to use pubmed and pubchem. I would go insane if the US made them unavailable to other countries. They were out during the government shut down. No i dont set out onions, but i also dont dismiss the viability without adequate research. The only reason i defended idle onions as a passive defense against illness was because i read about the wivestale being investigated by a doctor. In 5 minutes i was able to find a us patent for the antiviral from the single molecule I looked into. Bonus: also used in animal repellents

That’s not how parents work.

Onions actually do absorb bacteria

Was that the one about putting onions in your socks to detox? What a stinky way to sleep!

It actually works.

Source: ate a bunch of fruit after reading this post

hot chiles can indeed cure cancer. and chile/peppers are fruits. not nonsense at all. here is a non conspiracy theorist doctor talking about patients that cured prostate cancer with peppers and another with ginger.
not a cure all for everyone but these things cant hurt especially when other options have failed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yslpwaep17Q

No, you were downvoted fo nonsense.

please explain. the guy mocks the idea that a fruit can cure cancer. i showed how it can indeed.

No, you provided some nice pseudoscience. That’s really it.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21082859

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19002586

Yeah, just skimming through the abstracts of those two studies, and you know what stuck out?

in vitro

As in, in a test tube. You know what else kills cancer in a test tube? Bullets.

I don’t think two studies, both of which suggested further research, are a great way to make your point.

The first one even mentioned that there were negative effects for using the capsaicin dose to the cell’s mitochondria.

the doctor mentioned two cases where an alternative plant material cured his patients. idk how you can just call bs on it

you think they would ever do actual studies with people for this type of thing? of course not. people would just grow some pepper plants in their yard to cure their cancer. no tens of thousands spent on chemo etc

Yeah, no.

lol. gg

Your defense of a conspiracy theory is another, deeper conspiracy theory. Get a real argument.

you just totally dismiss a doctor telling how his patients cured their prostate cancer..

Megadoses of vitamin c cures cancer in lab rats. It’s like Alex Jones screeching “THE FROGS ARE GAY!!” There are bits of truth in most places, but the reality requires due diligence.

These are great years to be a rodent it seems.

Lmfao, fruits and vegetables are highly documented to contain anti-cancer flavonoids and antioxidants. This is fact.

Roflmao, you don't cure cancer by eating 20 apples a day.

I didn't say that, did I ... ?

The outrage at the attack on freedom of speech set aside, is facebook shooting themselves in the foot here ? They are deleting fanpages with millions of followers. They are giving their subscribers all the reasons they need to stop using facebook and go find the same content somewhere else instead.

Censoring alt news on facebook doesn't mean it's the end of alt-news. It's like when the large content producers get a movie streaming website or torrent website to close down, it doesn't mean the end of online streaming/DLing. Another such website will pop up the following week somewhere else on the planet.

When you censor, all you're doing is you shift the traffic to another website. Or do TPTB have another new web app ready to replace facebook ? with a better way to control the content for the masses ?

I think they did the studies that showed people care more about human interaction that clickbait spam headlines. I think it’s fine not being a platform for all-caps sensationalism with brands trying to monetize your attention 24/7 like Times Square.

truth, justice, health and freedom

By openly lying, misleading people about health, and ignoring basic science?

Massive crime? C'mon, I hate FB and Zuck just as much as the next person, but let's be realistic and less overdramatic. This isn't some giant mega crime, it's not even small crime.

And nothing of value was lost.

😂😂😂

I could care less and so should you

How much less could you care?

Don't get smart. But go ahead and keep making these stupid fucking shit posts

“Don’t get smart” appears to be your life motto.

Oh look every body we got a regular Dane Cook over here. Hey buddy if you can make even one person laugh you're doing pretty fucking good in life. Bravo. Brav fucking o.

R/im14andthisisdeep

Fuck you pussy

I laughed

He must be doing good then.....I laughed.

😡 whatever

You're a jackass. Retard.

A regular internet tough guy we got here.

You instigated a nonsense interaction just to put that guy down. And I'm the internet tough guy? Want my address? I'll PM you and we can meet up, pussy.

Proof of my last comment. Thank you. Have an enjoyable Sunday.

That's what I thought, coward. You picked the wrong person. Prove your shit talk or shut the fuck up.

Seriously, you’re delusional and you should get help. No one is going to fight you even if you magically lived 5 miles away. Get a grip on reality, man.

Oh because you're a pussy? Fighting is unrealistic? I'm glad you've had a cushy life, coward.

I’m just writing this comment to see what delusional thing you’ll type next.

Get a grip on reality. No one is going to waste time to visit you to fight. You’re not worth anyone’s time or consideration because everyone literally has better things to do.

Oh it's a waste of time now? You waste your time talking shit on the internet but now this is a waste? Fuck you pussy. I stand up for what I believe in and that makes me delusional? Fuck you pussy. I back up my shit and throw hands when it comes time. Fuck you pussy. You're a big talker on the internet. I bet you clam right up and cry when someone confronts you in person. Fuck you pussy. I'll come find you if that would be less of a waste of time. But you're scared shitless of someone you've never seen. Fuck you pussy.

Get. Help.

You know what will really make me feel better? Connecting my fist with your jaw. Fuck you pussy.

Internet Toughguy.

You can say that all you want. Send me your location and we'll find out who the IRL tough guy is. Pussy

Get. Help. No one wants to waste their time with you and your need to fight people.

Yet here you are. Fuck you pussy.

Rule #10

You aren't a good person because you think fighting is bad. You're a coward and a pushover. I can't wait for you to say the wrong thing to the wrong person.

As an outsider, what's your perspective on intelligence?

You have never been warned here before as far as I can see, but if you do not start observing Rule #10 and acting more civil while disagreeing I will issue your ban swiftly.

Rule #10

If he lives in NYC, I could find time out of my busy schedule to beat his ass, but we both know he’s just talking tough through his keyboard.

(*couldn't)

Shit website does shitty thing, who cares. How are you surprised and why does it matter? 'Crime against humanity' lol give me a break it's facebook get over yourself

If we're going to clean that Russia influence the election with a few thousand dollars in Facebook ads and that that's some travesty don't understand how you idiots can claim it it's no big deal if Facebook controls billions of dollars worth of in posts

This is a crime against humanity as far as I'm concerned

Little bit of an overstatement there. Facebook is just some company. Them not wanting to do business with these people isn't a crime.

losing their entire livelihoods here and also in many cases their passion/purpose in this world.
Without Facebook, they will lose their purpose in this world? Facebook?
I got no love for Facebook or Zuc but Facebook isn't a public utility, he can do whatever the hell he wants with it, it's his.

This one took too many alt medicines

I wonder how many of these pages sold or promoted bullshit health devices like magnetic brackets and magic crystals, or pushed anti-Vax crap?

So many. I'm a registered dietitian and glad these were deleted. The public is so misguided in finding sound information in terms of health advice and that was not helping. People are not going to the CDC or Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics for their first resource, they are going to facebook. When these Natural Health pages come up, people don't look into whose running them, their credentials, etc. They just see the posts and believe them

You think the cdc is any more honorable than face book click bait bs? Both are selling their access to customers with no concern for the validity of claims. The trillion dollar pharma industry is paying off the cdc to sell their poisons. What billionaires are funding all these "fake" natural treatment promotions? And how are they making enough money to be worth financing the spread of supposed lies? Even if you do happen to find some fake holistic cure being peddled by the same person attacking pharma meds, how is it now safe to assume that the same kind of greedy scum work in every industry?

there is corruption in every industry, however, there is no regulation in holistic or alternative medicine. It is so dangerous and predatory for consumers. The trial and approval process for pharmaceuticals is a lot more regulated and safer.

https://medium.com/@gidmk/complementary-medicine-kills-35e47d3f518d

I was wondering about the Nikola Tesla pages. Why did those get booted?

They got sold years ago to some spam corporation and have been pushing “magnets cure cancer” “don’t listen to doctors” garbage.

Ahh, that explains it. Thanks!

Tesla, tho

Sounds like they are going after brigading type of issues. What are the odds that you have so many friends with +1 million legit followers and that growth was all organic/not brigading/legitmate? I call bullshit.

Fb is going down

Hey how else can I find someone if I want to get in contact but don’t only know their name??

Not the worst part, you will now have to remember all the birthdays:)

Meh I’m not a bday guy but it’s like easy to “track “ people down if you know little info. Which I can be really helpful. If there was an alternative open-source free way secure

Truepeoplesearch.com its free you dont have to login or anything. Its fuckin terrifying because ALL the information is just there for anyone to see. Including yours. All you need is a name and a city.

Why would someone downvote this?

All of the people who owned these pages were your friends?

Comrades

Which means OPs friends are into shilling shit for money. These types of pages are the ones that promote lemon juice as a cure for cancer and shit. Pure trash. Freedom of speech doesn't give anyone a "right" to give out bad information.

Freedom of speech doesn't give anyone a "right" to give out bad information.

Better have a ministry of truth then to sort out the good information. /s

I see the mainstream trolls are out in force for this one. Guys, you're on conspiracy Reddit, alternative health should be discussed. All alternatives are welcome here.

Sure it can be discussed. Alternative medicine is alternative because it doesn't work. Healthcare being driven by profit is the conspiracy we should be paying attention to. And the fact that healthcare is pushed by money means things that work and make money are used by professionals. Things that don't work are posted about on Facebook.

Ayevedic and traditional Chinese medicine have thousands of years of history and certainly work, yet they are considered alternative in the West. So should we also ridicule and downvote people who advocate for them? I just see it almost every time alternative health is discussed on r/conspiracy.

traditional Chinese medicine

certainly work

Nope.

these people are shills. dont waste your time :/

Hm. Actually, no? Do some research on how ancient civilizations use plants and the world around them.

Do you think everything we use as medicine was just fucking synthesized in a lab? It ALL comes from nature.

Just because they have tarnished what could be called alternative medicine into something that’s considered a joke, doesn’t mean that there aren’t real, true alternative medicines out there.

The fact that we actually know next to nothing about nature, specifically fungus, should ward people off from making stupid bold claims like what you just said. But I guess we’re all doomed to repeat the same mistakes as always. Fuck it.

You know what we do with plants that work for medicine? We turn them into medicine.

That’s my fucking point.

Considering that your next paragraph claims that we know nothing about fungi, you clearly misunderstood what I said.

No I think you’re misunderstanding this whole thing my dude.

cannabis had been considered an alternative that didnt work for a long time. but we know now it does definitely work for many things

definitely some pharma shills and also just dumbasses that think mainstream pharmaceuticals are the only answer

Dont try to spread this fake news its mostly alt accounts. FB can see your ip.

Looks like nothing of value was lost.

9 exclamation points, front page, for a non-conspiracy.

A crime against humanity? What in the actual fuck.

Done with this sub.

Thank fucking god. I just wish people running those pages could be deleted from my life too.

Of course they(leftie Zuckerberg and whomever he is beholden to) delete the subversive stuff. Whats interesting is all the alternative health and wellness pages being deleted. Shows a wider agenda to this purge.

Of hiding complete bullshit?

I see you like to post a bunch of click bait bs to various subreddits. No wonder you're so unhinged.

Crime against humanity?

LOL.

A real crime against humanity is Trump's policy to separate children from their parents and use a company that once got caught with child trafficking and prostitution. A private company deleting a web page is far from being a crime against humanity.

U mean obamas policy to seperate children from there parents that trump ended?

No, since that wasn't an Obama policy. That falls squarely on Trump.

Nope

It was never a trump policy

It falls squarely on obama

And we have photos from 2014 to prove it

Despite what faux news wants u liberals to believe

Oh, you have pictures? Provide them. Then let's compare how many families are affected if it did happen.

https://imgur.com/HrFFojZ stop lying

It frankly doesn't matter how many people are affected. Different numbers of people are affected by laws every year. The fact is it happened under Obama which means it couldn't be trumps policy policy

I like how the red circle goes through "families", especially since Trump started the splitting up of families while families were detained together under Obama.

I don't see any parents in that cage

I don't see any children either.

So you're saying it's not really a child because the person is black? That's pretty racist

Nope. All I see are two unidentified female figures. They could be children, they could be mother daughter, they could be two grown ladies. However, given the text of the article, it sounds like either of the latter two and not two children.

You have a weird way of coming out as a racist.

I still don’t see anywhere in your link that proves there was an Obama policy to separate children from their families.

Probably because there wasn’t.

Then you aren't looking.

Except that you don’t, actually. Stop lying.

I can't tell if you people really believe that or are just complicit in this spreading of fake news im bad faith

Good riddance. Many of those are pseudoscience quackery. After losing someone to cancer, I can say get treated be licensed medical professionals and not some holistic bs.

Get em back by deleting Facebook.

A lot of those pages related to natural and organic health posted terribly wrong information with no evidence base. I have a background in nutritional science and dietetics, and social media, especially Facebook, has been one of the single worst sources of psuedoscience and false information for people. "B12 cures cancer and the government in keeping it from you, GMOs are bad, pesticides are bad, eat coconut oil to live forever" etc. etc. This shit spread like wildfire from pages like this on facebook and many of them were NOT evidence-based science or research.

I agree with much you've said, but pesticides are objectively bad for you, and this is not controversial information.

My point is that “organic” is 100% a marketing claim and not a health claim. Many consumers are unaware that “organic” does not mean “pesticide free”, and often times can be more risky, because organic pesticides are not regulated , while conventional ones are. Remember, it’s the dose not the poison. Apple seeds are full of arsenic. I can throw one in my blender for a smoothie and be fine. Buzzwords are great in this day and age. Working in this field has been crazy for me. I now cringe when I hear people talk about subjects like this.

http://www.crediblehulk.org/index.php/2015/06/02/glyphosate-toxicity-looking-past-the-hyperbole-and-sorting-through-the-facts-by-credible-hulk/

https://www.nbcnews.com/better/amp/ncna864156

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=pesticide+safety+in+food+peer+reviewed&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

https://eatrightfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/FoodAdditivesWebinarSlides.pdf

https://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/HealthyLiving/HealthyEating/Nutrition/Organic-Food-Fact-vs-Perception_UCM_425671_Article.jsp?appName=MobileApp

http://www.eatright-tn.org/node/892

Thank you for the articles, and you're absolutely right, organic vegetables and fruits are exposed to natural pesticides which is claimed to be more safe than conventional, but as you've said, they are not regulated. We don't really know their long-term effects, which is why cultivating our own foods would be the way to go. This doesn't apply to just vegetables or fruits, but meat too; chicken, for example, is bombarded with antibiotics which is also not a good thing long-term for our immune systems. Too bad we all can't all be farmers, eh? Damn, I wish I had a farm.

Thanks for being open minded to information, I truly appreciate it! I wish we could all grow our own food. We have all lost touch with the process of food, but, there are some benefits of our current food system. I highly recommend the book “The Dorito Effect” to read more into this. It’s a man’s exploration into flavor and what changed food in America. It’s research and science based, but easy to read. PS- even “antibiotic” can be misleading in poultry labeling. Especially “hormone-free”- all poultry is hormone free :)

https://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/about-the-industry/chickopedia/

https://www.consumerreports.org/overuse-of-antibiotics/what-no-antibiotic-claims-really-mean/

https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/food-safety-education/get-answers/food-safety-fact-sheets/food-labeling/meat-and-poultry-labeling-terms/meat-and-poultry-labeling-terms

Ps- Kansas State has a great infographic on this. I can online find a Pinterest link (of course)

https://pin.it/pz4nxtin6fw6ws

http://www.asi.k-state.edu/research-and-extension/antibiotics/index.html

There's a legitimate concern about the power and reach of tech companies once they reach a critical mass. Before it was google and facebook there was Microsoft in the '90s. That's not what this is about :

And these are only the pages I know about. All of them were owned by my friends. Many other pages have been deleted or unpublished recently. So many pages got deleted in June that Swapd.co halted the buying and selling of Facebook pages

A private for profit company got pissed a different company tried to monetize an aspect of their business model with their consent? That's not a conspiracy, it's capitalism.

This is a crime against humanity as far as I'm concerned

That's the ravings of a lunatic.

Til free speech only exists on publicly owned land such as parks or govt buildings

If its part of the 90% of america thats privately owned u dont have constitutional rights

This is how fascism happens. People who think that the only thing they should be scared of is the big bad government but worship corporations that are even bigger than the government

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of speech of is a concept. The first amendment is a restriction on the power of government. Although related they are different things.

It's also the government's job to protect your rights. Or do you believe that the only thing we have the government for us to collect taxes and Start Wars?

Cuz that would be the rino view on things things

It's only terrany for the government to do something that benefits the people peopl

Listen to yourself for a moment. The job of government is to serve its people. The role of government changes as circumstances and conditions change. The policies for an agrarian society will be different than those for an industrialized one. Adaptation happens on the fly and is never perfect. That was true in 1783 and is true today. The difficulty is over the last century the speed and impact of societal change has increased exponentially.

r/conspiracy is popular for two very different reasons. It's sometimes easier to believe the results are the product of a secret cabal than random chance. With all the moving, interlocking, and changing things in the world there's the chance a subtle innocuous at first glance change could have dramatic long-term consequences.

I don't buy into the idea there's a single group pulling the strings. I do believe however there people and groups exploiting the masses to increase their personal power and wealth.

If its part of the 90% of america thats privately owned u dont have constitutional rights

You absolutely do. Facebook can kick these pages to the curb, but you or I can ban trolls from our small, self-hosted websites. That means the owners of diners and bars can kick out...anyone they want, really.

People who think that the only thing they should be scared of is the big bad government but worship corporations that are even bigger than the government

I agree with this sentence completely, but the topic of this thread is not a good example.

I also think it's funny that all of these pages were owned by OP's friend, proving that Facebooks reason is likely consistent

So true haha like it really does only prove what this is... Sloppy

I wonder if Buzzfeed will get deleted. Now they are the definition of clickbait

I had no idea, I’ve stopped using Facebook like many millions of people every morning but do, the decline is only gaining steam.

They have never been more desperate to ‘clean up’ the experience, social networks are not really under anyone’s control tho, so it’s obviously not going to end well for FB.

I’d short the stock, except it’s hard to know how much the secret government props it up with it’s funny money.

They keep growing so short at your own risk. But can you explain how the government props it up with funny money?

Just delete Facebook and enjoy

I think the conspiracy here is the apparent accurate knowledge of 84 pages deleted, the number of followers for each page and the exact date they were deleted.

Buying and selling of Facebook pages?

No crime against humanity... maybe a crime against someone's wallet for loss of clickbait income...

Such is the circle of life...

Seems to me that the were a bunch of holistic and homeopathic bullshit, good thing they pulled the plug on their crazy

Why do they want us fucked up? People think I need sense knocked into me but why else would they do this? I used to be obese and I honestly think it’s a disease, sick of seeing my family kill them selves and then Facebook, (everyone’s addicted to their phones) wanting them to stay sick. Like they’re behind it or it’s part of the plan for people to eat themselves to death. And they honestly don’t understand that working out and being healthy isn’t embarrassing or bad like seriously fuck this modern world.

And my Friends Say I'm crazy to never be on FB.

Clinton is best friends with Zuckerburg. Enough Said.

Facebook is like injecting government disinfo right into your brain. It's literally the way they control the narrative. And you're crying about it.

Maybe they were tired of being a platform for socially-corrosive horseshit that feeds- and feeds on- people’s stupidity.

Good

Yeah this is why fuck Facebook

nikola tesla. lel. just like how they seized all his works and patents. :)

they are constantly culling good men

I cull the herd; s’what I do.

yeh yehh mini thanos scarecrow, will u now please stand back into your position on the wall of mini display toys behind the computer monitor beside groot, ty.

oh wait scaredy crow ehhh, not scarecrow? oh them fucking crows, they are the scorn of the earth, not only ugly, loud, annoying, detestable pests but also loved by idiotic, ever trying hard to please your masters, lackeys of death like yourself. never ever make your presence seen or felt around us no longer u end of dayz creature, you belong in some crow soup just as you think you can cull with no consequences of your own :)

lay off the ambien a little

reddits ur thing on sunday ehhh

lounging in and sipping beer and troll modes socks and half of the day you have at it for some self brought fun ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

I wish this sub would crack down on clickbait garbage as well. Half the posts here link to some shit blog in a desperate attempt to make money of ads.

Facebook is a cesspool. If this helps you stop getting your news from there, that's a good thing.

The people that most need real news are exactly the people that wont stop using Facebook because of this

OP, this page has been linked to TMOR, FYI.

Pretty spammy of you

Hey man he's just trying to protect his freedom of speech income.

All of them were owned by my friends.

Uh huh. Sure.

LEAVE FB, boycott all of their services and find a decentralized, encrypted alternative.

Did u do that? Cuz Facebook is still here

IDK what happened. You guys keep saying that if a few people delete their Facebook it's going to collapse but it never does does

Many have already left and many more will follow. An alternative will emerge and FB will be rendered obsolete.

Half of those websites listed are loaded with adds, click bait, false information, and propaganda.

Not really that much of a loss. Also who goes on Facebook any more?

all these alternative medicine pages. you know what they call alternative medicine that works? medicine.

Marijuana?

sure. do you got any?

Ill get a 3-D printer and hit u up

nah, alternative therapies/medicines are called alternative because they're not canonized under the umbrella of "Western Medicine." For instance, try reading up a little bit on the Gerson treatment for cancer, from the late Dr. Max Gerson. Their clinic had to be opened in Mexico because it wasn't legal to treat cancer by anything but chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery. Thus, it's alternative. Had great success rates with cancer patients whose mainstream doctors had given weeks to months to live. See, when an institution becomes so large and powerful like Western Medicine backed by big pharma, you end up with an effective monopoly on health care in most western countries. That's a problem because they certainly don't know it all and 2nd there are legitimate conspiracies carried out by that institution. Your comment makes it sound a little like a Catholic's perspective on other religions being "alternate religions" and not the "one true faith." Please continue your education.

Isn’t this kind of a good thing though?

OMG please ban me. I didn't realize I hadn't been banned from this cesspit.

Not the Jesse Ventura Fan Page!

This is WAR!

The only thing that really moves the needle with social media is privacy concerns. Everything else is forgotten real quick.

Yawn. Get the fuck off of their platform already. Don't depend on any information. Death will still find you.

Facebook is a corporate shithole. Anybody with a brain quit when it was revealed Facebook was selling your private info more than 10 years ago.

Well, a lot of those pages did more harm then good.

All of them were owned by my friends

So how many people owned these pages? 3? 25?

Wow. This sub is just so... wow

Maybe soon someone will just delete Facebook.

Ehhhhh.

1. It’s Facebook. Idk what the clickbaters expected.

2. A lot of that is junk. I’m sure some of it was valuable of good communities for discussion but a lot of it is Anti-Vaxx or MLM bull.

Well, /u/unidan got banned manipulating votes as a single guy. He was able to make himself a highly visible, power redditor, with I think only 5 accounts.

I'm really not upset that coordinated manipulation is being cracked down upon on Facebook, or even Reddit for that matter. There's just too much at stake from naive social media users that adapt their social norms/worldview to what they believe has been validated by their peers, via likes or upvotes.

!!! You shouldn't be using facebook for your fucking news !!!

i reposted this to The_Donald DELETE YOUR FACEBOOK

Book burnings have never been easier to commit, amd are more effective than ever.

Is it just me but thank the gods?

This is great news.

I feel compelled to learn everything I can now about plant medicine and natural health. Together We are powerful, love and light will win. 🌿🌿❤️❤️🌞🌞

Facebook is trash and if you are spending your time using it you have already lost the big game.

You people have made that horrid little rat Zuckerberg into a multi billionaire and have given him power over your lives, you only have yourselves to blame.

Wow trolls are in deep on this post.

If the health and wellness pages are promoting falsehoods about essential oils or homeopathic medicine,

then it's very understandable that Facebook would delete them.

Then again that does kind of slap the face of Facebook's core demographic.. elderly church ladies.

"Natural Cures Not Medicine"

Y'know what you call a natural cure when it works? Medicine.

"Natural Cures Not Medicine"

Y'know what you call a natural cure when it works? Medicine.

Or just basic nutrition.

Good. Finally getting rid of Fake News

OH NO!! FACEBOOK BAD IM SCARED!

Thank goodness

Facebook makes it a huge pain in the ass to delete your account.

So you’re saying all I have to do is post “MAGA!!” and they’ll delete my account for me?

Since these pages are no longer available what alternative websites do you like?

I mean, I'm surprised you still trust facebook! They own their site and they do what they want with it.

Delete yours, don't contribute, find something new. Resisting gives strength to the force you are trying to resist.

can we talk about how this connects to Roswell or is everything fucking political these days?

Good riddance

This attitude creeps me out even more than the expected cull of alternative opinion pages on FB. There are people amongst us that want to get rid of anything that is different from the opinion of the 'righteous'. That was once called book burning. You lot are dangerous to free thinking. A truly free society will give the chance to hear what someone else has to say and let them make up their own mind.

If it is all rubbish, people will soon know. If it isn't...then you'll s#it yourself only...because they might be right and others might find out! Safer to 'burn' ehem, delete certain pages.

Erm, no. That’s not how this works. At all.

I can see all my liberal coworkers nodding along in agreement that purging these "fake news" sites from the Internet can only be a good thing. Too many stupid people believe this shit, best to not allow them to see it. And yes, my liberal coworkers are the people who have or will work at Facistbook.

It's the modern day equivalent of book burning. Deny them a presence on FB, then deny them listings in the search engines.

Nope.

Allow me to retort!

If you don't pay for the product... You are the product.

Eh. Lots of pseudoscience pages by the looks of it. Good riddance.

Why? Because you don't like it? I find pages of babies and food very boring and nonsensical, why not get rid of everyone's page because let's be honest, there are no really exciting pages anywhere on FB? Plus as long as these pages bring in readers, isn't it what FB is based on? You are a bookburner and you shouldn't be proud of that.

Because pseudoscience pages are filled with unsubstantiated bullshit.

And all MSN is truth [OMG, rolling my eyes].

Don't be dumb, alternative sites report on everything, especially new things that the MSM doesn't want to pick up yet That doesn't mean 'it's all BS'? What an inane response.

You seem to lack live experience, as I have often seen alternative views/findings/opinions become accepted after enough research.

You have your fingers firmly in your ears and seem to be a slave to MSM. Read a bit more and do your own research.

Stop putting words in my mouth.

Lol top comment attack post as usual. Facebook censors what they deem to be a threat and finding healing in nature is something they are against

https://deletefacebook.com

all of them were owned by my friends

Lol

Good riddance.

I’m confused why people are even on FB still. Let the echo chamber have it all to themselves. Give them what they want! If every red-pilled and/or truly privacy conscious person disappeared all at once, they’d get their wake up call.

Good. Less bullshit, the better

Ask yourself how information was verified before the internet. Through confirmed sources, and information passed via a paper trail. The problem now is no one uses the paper trail anymore, so it makes things harder to confirm.

Here you go folks, you wanna see what social engineering is? Look no further.

Facebook is a cancer. You are doing yourself and everyone around you a disservice if you still use Facebook.

You have to put in for a whole fucking process to permanently delete your account; I just did it, it’s worth it. Fuck Facebook and fuck anyone who thinks they get to play Big Brother like this. Simply fucking disgusts me.

Most of these promote bullshit alternative medicines that only harm people in the long run. Good riddance. It should be considered a crime against humanity to support that bullshit.

OP is full of shit

Is he?

these all sound like places even WE don't need to worry about.

What happens when it is though?

If you needed a reason to quit facebook for good, now you have it.

https://minds.com

I wonder how much zucc the cucc is paying to curate this comment thread.

In before: They're a company, they can do whatever they like! This sub is full of a bunch of idiots!! etc. etc. etc.

Wonder if you're gonna chat in to one of my buddies and try to get the Pages re-published if you haven't already.

The support guys are more like middle-men so don't get too upset at em if the Pages can't be helped.

The only crime is that you still use Facebook

Good, most of these pages are spreading misinformation en masse.

They're not deleted from my end. Check your settings.

STOP using Fuckerbergs Face Book!

Wow. A few that I used to follow. What’s that say that all these were about self improvement and fixing your own problems. People are woke af.

This is actually unreal. Completely blatant!

I can't speak for all of em' but the ones I've seen spread BS and I've confronted didn't even care. They told me to just chill. I hope the just chill when they pay for what they did. Most of those are not health and wellness pages. They are cleverly packaged as such. Much like an affiliate market campaign. Good riddance.

i got deleted off youtube last christmas... i'm actually part glad as i got a large chunk of free time back. the internet is dead people.. we need to get off it. they are going to use it against us now. everything will soon be done online and it will be hard to avoid it unless you ditch ur computer.

just delete your fucking facebook already. if you're still on there you're a huge part of the problem.

Wouldn't happen if we open source everything (including Facebook, YouTube, and any other platform, and I don't mean open source these precise websites, I mean we better start building open source alternatives for them).

OPEN SOURCE EVERYTHING — that's what we as humanity/human society should do. We should start making open source designs of EV cars, computers, smartphones, home appliances, even such platforms as YouTube/Facebook/etc., even education, healthcare, housing, food, energy, robotics, sensors, you name it.

Until we start doing that — human progress (and our freedom) will remain very, very handicapped.

Good. Fuck pseudoscience.

Backbone of stock market, vital national interest and a derp state conspiracy all in one

Who all just happens to work in the clickbait industry? Of course they can, but that obviously means that OP is a clickbaiter himself, worried about his income and not anything else.

Go for it. I won't use it, but you're more than welcome to try.

Good luck!

I think the reason is because Facebook found that it’s users don’t want to be pummeled with clickbait spam and forwards from grandma and these pages and organizations didn’t want to play by those rules and continued spammy posts begging for likes and shares.

How much less could you care?

The US government is filled with the people that us as a population decide to vote in there. You should be mad at your fellow countrymen for putting in those moronic people or those traitorous dick bags in office

Not the worst part, you will now have to remember all the birthdays:)

Do it then! That is the obvious step, not crying on Reddit asking everyone to agree that Facebook is so mean.

Regardless I'm glad these journalistic con men are losing a platform with wide reach. Go join the sandwich board people downtown saying the apocalypse is coming.

😡 whatever

Truepeoplesearch.com its free you dont have to login or anything. Its fuckin terrifying because ALL the information is just there for anyone to see. Including yours. All you need is a name and a city.

This is always said but nothing ever happens

Get. Help. No one wants to waste their time with you and your need to fight people.

if you got moneys to spare on brain power, equipment (considering that AWS can equally purge you), then go for it.

You could do that before. Make a website.

Just because corporations have made a few bullshit studies to further their companies doesn't mean you should just disregard science and all of its benefits to suit your needs.

Oh I see now, I re-read your comment.

With big bold lettering so you know what you're Goebbels wants you to think.

well, personally i think the legal definition of free speech is outdated and should be applied to online interactions. if that's too restrictive on business for whatever reason, then i would support government ownership of the internet and the creation of public forums like what you suggested.

Churches, civic-involvement organizations, or simply talking face-to-face. But here's my question - do you see anyone who came of age over the past 20 years (millennials, Gen Z) adopting any of these unless the internet suddenly disappears? Humans are lazy, and online communication is the path of least resistance.

Or just basic nutrition.

what if verizon was the only major service provider? facebook is technically free, but it is required communication for many vocations, services and social circles. as such i consider it a de facto public service.

and besides, my original point still stands regardless of whether or not facebook is a de facto public service or not. the law is not always just. let's say that when the US first came into being, all people in the state were legally considered "public servants." to outlaw murder, the law stated: "public servants are not allowed to commit murder." 300 years later, the US decides to create a legal differentiation between public servants and private citizens.

if they changed nothing else, the murder law would no longer apply to people considered private citizens. under the law as written, private citizens would be allowed to murder, and yet it's pretty obvious that such a thing would not only be morally wrong, but would also be a misunderstanding of the purpose of the original murder law.

when free speech laws were first created, states were the primary power structures of the day. states were banned from censoring others not only because they were states, but because they represented the powerful against the weak; the purpose of free speech laws was to ensure that all viewpoints and arguments could be heard and discussed by the citizenry, even if they challenged the predominant power structure.

we now live in a world where the predominant power structures are corporations and big businesses, rather than the state itself. though free speech laws cannot be applied to these structures in court, if we were following the spirit or purpose of the original law, we could and would. i'm essentially saying the laws are outdated in multiple ways, this being the primary one.

Rule #10

I think immediate relatives can jump through 100 hoops and have it deleted

You have never been warned here before as far as I can see, but if you do not start observing Rule #10 and acting more civil while disagreeing I will issue your ban swiftly.

What law says you can't "upload porn and shit"?

I don't recall stating that there was a law that restricted uploading of "porn and shit" to the internet. Kind of a strange claim to make.

If your argument is that free speech applies everywhere without restriction

Where did I state that again?

You are way over analyzing.

Caring about upvotes/downvotes in anymore than a casual manner shows signs of addiction to social media, which is possibly worse for people than smoking. SNS know this, and have crafted their products to become even more addictive.

Labeling me this or that because it makes you feel better is part of the addiction. So, perhaps you'll never wake up and stop giving a shit about this crap.

To each his own.

I am an extremely analytical person. I think it is interesting. It doesnt have anything to with me as a person, or obviously whoever up or down votes. But the number is there. Its an available data point. I cannot ignore it nor do I really want to ignore it. I comment because I feel like I have something to say, and that talley regulates the visibility of that comment.

It wasnt my intention to label you as a person. I was speaking about your behavior here. As its a pattern that I have seen many times. I sometimes enjoy a back and forth with a person so much that i ignore the number and thats great because I am more into the reaction of just one person.

I think you are right about the social media addiciton being a problem. But you dont have enough information to say I have the problem.

So do you at all see anything strange about what you just did here? Randomly making a comment about what I said about upvote that was clearly antagonistic and unnecessary. Then coming back and further judging me over this internet crap that I should not give a shit about? When I dont give a shit about this internet crap am I going to start finding random comments that in not way are my business and are completely harmless and telling people how to feel about them? And then not caring so much I came back and said another thing? Then once again make fun of the person for caring about this internet crap that I am also on and clearly care about?

Maybe someone here does have a problem with this social media.

How are you going to pay for server time. If people don't pay for the service some one has to. You think facebook servers run on freedom or the programmers are paid in likes? Social media is not a public service, its a business and if the users are not willing to pay a subscription then the users will be the product.

The government may make no law that infringes or restricts your right to express yourself. That's it. That does not extend to the private property of others.

Yet the governments -- federal and states -- do just that.

Over half of all US States now have laws that prohibit state agencies from doing business or entering into contracts with persons or entities that support boycotting Israel (a foreign nation) in any way.

The Federal government is working to craft similar restrictions.

Would you care to take a WILD GUESS as to which groups have been pushing such draconian laws through? Did you know that it is these SAME GROUPS that are pushing private companies (Fakebook, Twatter, Weddit, etc) into shoving censorship -- in all forms -- on their users?

A

D

L

I agree with this

I was being sarcastic

Also, there’s a related case of that famous small bakery that was being forced to bake a gay wedding cake – against their wishes. All the leftists said they MUST do it, although it’s a private business.

But now their right not to bake the cake has been vindicated.

(*couldn't)

You're spot on in regard to money. Pharmaceutical companies run the FDA who in turn skews the process of clinical studies heavily in their favor. You've still got to have more than just anecdotal accounts. There's a difference between an open mind and blind faith. Fruit was never going to cure Steve Jobs's cancer.