you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Far_Side_of_ForeverOption 4 alum 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

  1. Sounds fine. I miss the untamed wild west of the internet

  2. Very detailed, thank you. I already figured out what the little people down on the ground are upset about; this blatant suppression has been both sloppy and insulting. I worded the question poorly; I was more wondering why the powers-that-be were going apeshit over this, especially with the outlets you listed on KiA2 who have released the name

From my perspective, it'd be like, foe example, if our overlords decided that Charlie Sheen is a problem and began suppressing all information and mention of him. We already know who is he, what he's done and what he's said; why bother at this point?

[–]DomitiusOfMassilia[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I was more wondering why the powers-that-be were going apeshit over this, especially with the outlets you listed on KiA2 who have released the name

My hypothesis is that Mark Zaid, the whistleblower's attorney, is probably sending out threatening letters to corporations that publish Eric's information. Add that Schiff and others are (falsely) claiming that reproducing the whistleblower's name opens corporations up to legal liability, and may violate the law.

Being that this confirms their biases, they will fold quickly under pressure.

[–]Far_Side_of_ForeverOption 4 alum 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And I imagine that, if Zaid's tactic here does not work within the legal framework, reddit will neither rescind the new rule, nor reinstate communities that go under due to this

All part of the plan

[–]DomitiusOfMassilia[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Correct.