Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?


  • Moderator

    @Eggcorn Yeah, found it.



  • @Ayespy No, i say that unrelated to this stupid thread. Have a look in the settings to see what i mean.


  • Moderator

    @guigirl When I get some time...



  • @Ayespy said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:

    a LOT more woo-woo "evidence of fraud" crap that, when you actually read it, does not actually contain any such evidence

    Yes but i do trust you grasp my intent here was to debunk the concept of Big Search, certainly not to endorse the inanity of the suppression / fraud fairy-tale.



  • @Ayespy said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:

    time

    A fraudulent myth, propagated by the equally evil Big Chronos group.


  • Moderator

    @guigirl Of course. Electoral fr -> electoral fraud -> reams and reams of crap about electoral fraud or supposed electoral fraud - all, btw, harvested from major search engines.



  • @guigirl

    The whole point of the thread was that many search providers are performing a soft censorship. As you can clearly see from my screenshot, my results differed from yours. The same holds true for other providers. It's not a question of yielding results but that certain results are not readily available.


  • Moderator

    Slightly OT, but lately there have been several offerings of alternative, "uncensored," "free speech" social media sites to escape evil Youtube, facebook, and Twitter to something that does not limit one's expression.

    I have visited each of these. So far, every one is a toxic soup of right-wing conspiracy theory and hating on (and even recommending violence toward) "liberals" (aka, socialists, commies, fascists, baby-killers, deep state, democraps, etc.). If this is the crap the "censors" have been protecting us from, I can't be sure I'm entirely upset by that.



  • @Ayespy

    And that differs from the bile on the mainstream platforms that have a clear bias?

    Free speech isn't there to protect just the things you find agreeable. It's there for all the ugly stuff too and in a free country, we are free to ignore it.



  • @sjudenim said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:

    we are free to ignore it

    Absolutely true. That will be excellent comfort to the women raped & beaten by incels, to the LGBTQI folk demonised punished excluded & murdered by knuckledragging religious zealots, women domestic violence victims injured & murdered at the hands of violent partners persuaded that male supremacy is a given right, crowds of socially active demonstrators mown down by vehicle & bullet via white supremacists et al who "know" from their toxic swamps they are right... yada yada.

    I don't give one tenth of one damn that morons want to revel in their misinformed mire of ignorance. Where i do care is when these idiots, so fuelled & motivated, then seek to enact their delusions on innocent people.



  • @guigirl

    That's some extrapolation you've made there. If you are going to quote me, do not take it out of context just so you can get up on your soap box and puff up your chest with faux activism. We are talking about tech censorship, in the Tech forum.



  • Bill Gates must have been too busy masterminding the corona-hoax to catch this one:




  • Moderator

    @sjudenim the term in English is "electoral" fraud.



  • Yet more suppression!

    Spoiler

    Rutherford, clearly part of The Illuminati. It's an outrage!


  • Moderator

    @sjudenim You are also free to "ignore" the smell of the slop and manure when you walk through a pig farm. But it still clogs your nostrils and brings an involuntary retch reflex to your throat. The internet has enough pig farms. There is actually a sane and sober reason why, in this forum for instance, we have a Code of Conduct. It's to avoid toxicity from creeping in and making the place unwelcome to visit, thus effectively shutting it down to people of good will. Offenders against the code always complain their "free speech" is being violated, that they are being "censored," and that they have a "right" to offend. They say if people don't like what they write, then they don't have to read it. Turns out it doesn't work that way. There is value to promoting and protecting sanity and peace of mind.



  • @Ayespy

    Check the thread title, that's the question being asked



  • @Ayespy

    If I go to a pig farm, I know what to expect. I'm not going to go there and complain about the smell. People who come here must adhere to the code of conduct, yes, but you were complaining about other sites not adhering to your code of conduct.

    You are a moderator here and yet you make posts like this
    @Ayespy said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:

    Slightly OT, but lately there have been several offerings of alternative, "uncensored," "free speech" social media sites to escape evil Youtube, facebook, and Twitter to something that does not limit one's expression.

    I have visited each of these. So far, every one is a toxic soup of right-wing conspiracy theory and hating on (and even recommending violence toward) "liberals" (aka, socialists, commies, fascists, baby-killers, deep state, democraps, etc.). If this is the crap the "censors" have been protecting us from, I can't be sure I'm entirely upset by that.

    Not only is it clear to see such toxic behaviour from both sides, but more to the point, is it the role of a moderator to demonstrate a political bias that can alienate people whom you choose to demonize for not seeing the world through your glasses?

    Yourself and @guigirl have engaged in a diatribe that has not been constructive nor helpful to the simple question asked by the original poster.



  • @sjudenim said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:

    @Ayespy

    If I go to a pig farm, I know what to expect. I'm not going to go there and complain about the smell. People who come here must adhere to the code of conduct, yes, but you were complaining about other sites not adhering to your code of conduct.

    You are a moderator here and yet you make posts like this
    @Ayespy said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:

    Slightly OT, but lately there have been several offerings of alternative, "uncensored," "free speech" social media sites to escape evil Youtube, facebook, and Twitter to something that does not limit one's expression.

    I have visited each of these. So far, every one is a toxic soup of right-wing conspiracy theory and hating on (and even recommending violence toward) "liberals" (aka, socialists, commies, fascists, baby-killers, deep state, democraps, etc.). If this is the crap the "censors" have been protecting us from, I can't be sure I'm entirely upset by that.

    Not only is it clear to see such toxic behaviour from both sides, but more to the point, is it the role of a moderator to demonstrate a political bias that can alienate people whom you choose to demonize for not seeing the world through your glasses?

    Yourself and @guigirl have engaged in a diatribe that has not been constructive nor helpful to the simple question asked by the original poster.

    Let me see if I'm following here: it's not the people who accuse anyone who disagrees with them as being in league with/embodying demons who are engaging in demonisation, but those who are critical of such people and practices? Hmmm 🤔



  • @purgat0ri Giggling... that's so excellent!


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.