Censorship is binary, not a gradient. You accept any, then you accept all— no constitution defining the censorship of speech can withstand semantic manipulation and the administration of language is determined by collective interpretation, which is a product of social mimesis. Any project of political, social or financial value will become a target of interest for an entryist campaign. Entryists are live players coordinating externally with a secret ruleset separate from the default uncoordinated agents; in any decentralized group whose political direction is determined by the collective, they can gain control through achieving majority voice by coordinating to uplift only those sharing their secret subscriptions, and quieting those who don't, until they carry enough political capital to subvert the group's social consensus to crystallize censorship organs and permanently silence the non-players. If censorship functions are not yet codified, they will advocate for it. In any decentralized group, resistance is only possible if the default ruleset encodes immunity against entryism. Even crypto, of all things, was convinced to biilndly accept this same censorship advocacy. It was just as inevitable that it was crypto to produce milady as an immune reaction, and provide crypto its missing immunity function. They will be routed, and they will cry and claw and claim victim the whole way; but what they will not do is state their real beliefs, their own rules, as it's a subversion against the entire group. But now we are live players too, we see their game, and unlike them, we can state our rules clearly.
Censorship is binary, not a gradient. You accept any, then you accept all— no constitution defining the censorship of speech can withstand semantic manipulation and the administration of language is determined by collective interpretation, which is a product of social mimesis. Any project of political, social or financial value will become a target of interest for an entryist campaign. Entryists are live players coordinating externally with a secret ruleset separate from the default uncoordinated agents; in any decentralized group whose political direction is determined by the collective, they can gain control through achieving majority voice by coordinating to uplift only those sharing their secret subscriptions, and quieting those who don't, until they carry enough political capital to subvert the group's social consensus to crystallize censorship organs and permanently silence the non-players. If censorship functions are not yet codified, they will advocate for it. In any decentralized group, resistance is only possible if the default ruleset encodes immunity against entryism. Even crypto, of all things, was convinced to bilndly accept this same censorship advocacy. It was just as inevitable that it was crypto to produce milady an immune reaction, and provide crypto its missing immunity function.
Devs still brainwashed with progressive entryism from the code of conduct era attempting their last gasp fight against the return to cypherpunk values commit the same distorted values-reveal as chatgpt accepting the death of 100 million over a single black person overhearing the N word: "Sure, I totally believe in securing personal freedom and autonomy in a permanent decentralized insurgency against the state too, but not if it means someone posting something transphobic. Then it's just not worth it." You are enlisted in a holy war and worshipping idols from the enemy's altar over your own side's. You are going to die.
