these are absolutely unreal. causing your girlfriend to die of hypothermia and then bringing her dead body back indoors to stream next to her corpse goes worlds beyond what i’d guessed a “trash stream” would be, holy shit 😦
I don’t know whether the law is written broadly enough to do that.
There are of course free speech concerns here, but if the law only targets cases where violence or other criminal activity was engaged in specifically to film it, even I don’t see that this contradicts my broad understanding of free speech rights.
your comment would be received a lot better if it said “Does this apply to pictures exposing torture or genocide?”. you’re very confidently claiming it does this thing, and so you got downvoted because it’s not true.
I realize. Even if it came across as not being able to post snuff, one would think that would be a good thing, but my stars, the level of inability to consider different possibilities or inquire says as much. So I left it. It shows that if the messenger has delivered messages not officially approved by the bandwagon before will automatically be taken in the worst return later.
And that’s not even touching on bandwagon fallacy.
So, no pictures exposing torture or genocide. Got it.
…no. Did you see the articles about the death of that French streamer? It’s about that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trash_stream
It’s the modern version of bum fights.
these are absolutely unreal. causing your girlfriend to die of hypothermia and then bringing her dead body back indoors to stream next to her corpse goes worlds beyond what i’d guessed a “trash stream” would be, holy shit 😦
yeah, i think i’m okay with this being banned 😓
the terms from other countries seem much better, “pathostream” (which i’d translate to “psychostream” to get the message across) or “rotstream”.
I was thinking Jackass but bum fights is probably more accurate. God humanity is bleak sometimes.
I don’t know whether the law is written broadly enough to do that.
There are of course free speech concerns here, but if the law only targets cases where violence or other criminal activity was engaged in specifically to film it, even I don’t see that this contradicts my broad understanding of free speech rights.
Well at least you understood the comment.
your comment would be received a lot better if it said “Does this apply to pictures exposing torture or genocide?”. you’re very confidently claiming it does this thing, and so you got downvoted because it’s not true.
I realize. Even if it came across as not being able to post snuff, one would think that would be a good thing, but my stars, the level of inability to consider different possibilities or inquire says as much. So I left it. It shows that if the messenger has delivered messages not officially approved by the bandwagon before will automatically be taken in the worst return later.
And that’s not even touching on bandwagon fallacy.
You made shit up and got downvotes for being full of shit nothing more.