Katie, on #8, with the win.

A delightful/attractive mix of corn syrup, artificial flavor, yellow #6, yellow #5, and red #3, you can get CandyCorn™ in 100-plus-lb. garbage bags the day AFTER Halloween, for pennies on the dollar -- and it'll be just as Good for any future Halloweens as it was the day it was made.

Drag your Bag home today!

"We Need to Stop Using Twitter"

Please add Facebook, Instagram, and all other social media as well. They distract and waste time. Organizing requires actual work: door-to-door, meet on the street, volunteer at a progressive org, manage those mailing lists.

Michael, Lester, Nathalie, Katie, Elli, Rich, @1 Call Me Scott, @2 kristofarian, and @3 tensor: I KNOW, right? I nominate you all for the WIN! Bravo. I needn't say any more.

"Every time the Trump gets a fact-free headline, they’re effectively disseminating misinformation, which is against the rules!" Yeah, but they don't give a fuck about 'the rules' -- unless they're projecting on the Libs.

And Owning/Controlling the Airwaves (/webwaves?)
has proven essential to massive Corporate
duopolistic (see also: Dems/R's) takeover.

Because Propaganda fucking WORKS.

Stranger readers might drop dead of surprise to learn that gerrymandering was not invented yesterday by mustache twirling Republican cartoon villains, and that indeed, 9 out of 10 of the most gerrymandered districts in America are solidly Democratic (my own home district in Massachusetts was gerrymandered to get rid of the lone remaining MA Republican in our congressional delegation - and it worked). A large part of the problem is that 90% of the people currently outraged about gerrymandering had no idea what the word even meant until they either heard it slung around by someone else who doesn't know what it means, either (but heard it on "House of Cards"!).

Eli Sanders, like most perpetually outraged left-of-center commentators, confuses free speech with the first amendment of the US constitution (an admittedly common mistake). It is true that no online platform is obliged to support free speech, it is equally true that doing would lead to better outcomes, both for the platforms and their users.

As usual, curtailing free speech anywhere (in the public or private spheres) is never limited to "this one bad thing that surely every good upright person must hate!" and inevitably creeps into an ever expanding catalog of "exceptions" that are confusing at best, infuriating at worse, and turns the platform into just another weapon to Make People I Don't Like Shut Up Before They Disagree With Me Or Hurt My Feelings.

@6: Why anyone is fooled by this obvious canard that only Republicans gerrymander, I have no idea. I guess some people are just really stupid.

The party in power does it, and they do it every time. If anything, the desire to redraw districts to consolidate power is the most bipartisan thing they do.

The problem is that for some bizarre reason, political parties are given this freedom, instead of nonpartisan citizen groups, or an automatic system based on some sort of mathematical/geographical system with no regards to party lines.

@7 - that's not even vaguely true. The internet is far more than the web, and is not confined to America. There are plenty of places around the globe where neither governments, nor service providers, nor administrators have the inclination or interest to police content, because it's too time consuming.

@11 Your argument that this "fantasy internet" has never existed is incorrect. It actually still exists - all over the place - and I have worked for providers who, literally, went. Eventually, people decided that fun and convenience of platforms that restrict speech are worth it, until they stop, and go somewhere else. This is true for both service providers and platform providers (the two are not synonymous, and never haven been).

I have not, nor ever, argued that anyone is obliged to maximize free speech, or compel speech, but keep thwacking away at that strawman. Your responses are the only thing more robotic than your avatar.

I am guessing Skippy's personal library is a complete disorganized mess, wouldn't want to restrict speech by organizing things now would we.

@14 I find it hilarious that the Strangertariat finds it hilarious to argue for order as a reason to oppose free speech, while simultaneously screeching that Donald Trump is the greatest threat to liberty, like ever.

We all get to make individual choices. Yet the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Platforms can, and do, institute content rules/policing. Yet it does not always lead to good outcomes, and invariably comes back to bite the people who were howling for these restrictions right in the ass.

There has been no internet moral panic du jour - whether hate speech or fake news or whatever else it is today - that has led any outcomes better than simply doing nothing. Users of almost every platform have the ability to block or ignore content that offends them - demanding no platforming is not only necessary, but again, leads to shitty outcomes in the long term.