• Welcome to Sanctuary! We have a chatbox but it's disabled until you sign in. All our official content can be found here. If you have any questions, try our FAQ here or make a thread!

Edit War on the Wiki Page for the Mormon "Fight the New Drug" Anti-Porn Non-Profit

andersonnnunes

⚝Future Author of Things✩are✩Looking✩Up v2.0z⚝
Messages
242
Just because I like to hear a wide range of opinions, I follow the blog of this anti-porn non-profit called "Fight the New Drug", as well as the article about it on Wikipedia.

Everything they have published up until now has failed to impress me.
The fact that the funding is plentiful and comes from mostly Mormons is a salient point.
People trying to remove that from the wiki article makes it even more interesting.
The timing of a proposal to delete the page is even more suspicious, as it could be interpreted as scorched earth strategy - "if I can't have it my way, no one shall have it".

I don't follow other Mormon related puppets, so I don't know if this is the usual. I will keep following this to see how it unfolds.
 

Arnox

Veteran
Staff member
Administrator
Global moderator
Clan member
Messages
3,257
Just because you're LDS doesn't mean you know how to handle the internet.
 

Arnox

Veteran
Staff member
Administrator
Global moderator
Clan member
Messages
3,257
Why would being LDS mean that you know how to handle the internet?
It's a common misconception that people have that if someone believes in the truth of a religion, then that means they must think that everything that religion does and touches is flawless and perfect. Religions are staffed by people though. And people are fallible.
 

Houseman

The Actual Hero
Messages
460
Ooh, interesting. Too bad the link appears to be 503'd

edit: oh, it's back. My HOT TAKE incoming:

eh, DMCA is kinda boring. We're always told as JWs: don't record and upload, or re-upload online content, etc., as that would constitute a violation of copyright. Seems like they want to control their content and the context it's viewed in. This is the first time I've ever heard about them actually doing anything about it.

Seems like a litigious entity doing litigious things. Not surprised.

I'm confused about the relationship between a DMCA and a subpoena, the latter being where you ask for someone's personal information. Seems like if you just want something removed, you don't need the latter, only the former, unless you wanted to also sue the person maybe? Does a DMCA justify a subpoena? In this case they would probably want it so that they could disfellowship them.

Can't say I blame them for wanting to root out dissension wherever they find it.
 
Last edited:
Top