Yeah, no.
It's still censorship even if the person in question wants it to be censored.
People shouldn't get to dictate whether or not wikipedia articles are made of them.
That doesn't make it ok.
I don't see it affecting me too much, but I feel bad for the people it will affect.
None at all. Mods are happy for the opportunity to dictate what other people get to say.
It's not work for them.
You should use Friendica as a replacement for facebook.
I don't really see a point in something like Instagram, considering you can just share pictures on facebook already, but Pixelfed is the logical replacement for it.
Make it sexy.
If you had an easier time getting laid fighting back instead of going along, then that's what people would start doing.
Youtube is actual trash and we have modern designers and businessmen to blame.
The lack of western media reporting on the state of Ukraine leads me to believe they will make concessions to end the war soon.
Part of how propaganda works is not reporting on things that make 'your side' look bad. In other words, "no news is bad news."
Democrat politicians are just representing their base.
Most democrats don't want the disparity in wealth to shrink because they would have less money relative to their peers. It's why they voted against Bernie, twice.
As soon as neo-liberals' wealth is threatened, they get right in bed with conservatives.
Neither party represents workers, which is why it's stupid for millions of workers to get up in arms defending them. It's why the average person is a useful idiot.
Wikipedia already doesn't allow that, so your question is pointless.