I take it as “Queer activists tell people who support censorship they don’t belong at pride”
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
on 25 Jun 03:39
collapse
Kinda but more directed towards lawmakers or congress to stay home who state they support the community by going to pride events or protests against the administration but in reality support the censorship towards the community. The examples of bills tell me it’s directed towards the lawmakers or politicians.
This is an excellent policy position, if only the argumentation wasn’t dogshit. I am begging everyone even vaguely lib-left, stop writing like this. If you’re trying to write a petition, open letter, or public statement, for the love of god write it for people other than yourselves or just don’t say anything at all.
Internet censorship is bad for alphabet people, but it’s also bad for the straights. It’s bad for everyone. It’s just bad.
Freedom is for everyone. And Heritage wasn’t coming to the parade anyway.
threaded - newest
Just noticed KOSA starts with KOS. Was that
internationalintentional, like DOGE?… Neither DOGE nor KOSA are international. They are localised to the United States of America.
Pretty sure he meant intentional.
That’s right. I even corrected that typo before I posted, or so I had thought.
What’s the significance of ”KOS”?
KOS is “kill on sight”, a video game term.
Interesting, never heard that before. TIL.
I don’t quite understand the “stay at home” to protest against anti lgbt laws. Isn’t it supposed to be the other way around?
I take it as “Queer activists tell people who support censorship they don’t belong at pride”
The only org they call out by name is The Heritage Foundation.
I assumed that they were already skipping the parade.
The author is telling those companies/politicians to stay home (don’t come to pride/don’t pretend to support pride).
If I’m reading it correctly, are they telling the homophobes to stay home?
Or is it more like a general strike for the LGBTQ community?
It’s not very clearly written.
I take it as “Queer activists tell people who support censorship they don’t belong at pride”
Kinda but more directed towards lawmakers or congress to stay home who state they support the community by going to pride events or protests against the administration but in reality support the censorship towards the community. The examples of bills tell me it’s directed towards the lawmakers or politicians.
The author is telling those companies/politicians to stay home (don’t come to pride/don’t pretend to support pride).
This headline… do I smell toast?
This is an excellent policy position, if only the argumentation wasn’t dogshit. I am begging everyone even vaguely lib-left, stop writing like this. If you’re trying to write a petition, open letter, or public statement, for the love of god write it for people other than yourselves or just don’t say anything at all.
Internet censorship is bad for alphabet people, but it’s also bad for the straights. It’s bad for everyone. It’s just bad.
Freedom is for everyone. And Heritage wasn’t coming to the parade anyway.
What is the technology angle here? What does this have to do with technology?