patrick.net

The Guardian report sounds optimistic to the point of delusion. It quotes Tim saying, "“Humanity connected by technology on the web is functioning in a dystopian way. We have online abuse, prejudice, bias, polarisation, fake news, there are lots of ways in which it is broken. This is a contract to make the web one which serves humanity, science, knowledge and democracy." The Guardian paraphrase claims the contract "will protect people’s rights online from threats such as...prejudice and hate" and enabling users "to build communities that respect civil discourse and human dignity...to fight for an open web that is “a global public resource for people everywhere”."

How will he contend with the "Muslim world plan against blasphemous content" led by Pakistan? How will he contend with KSA defining all atheists as terrorists (because they question the fundamentals of Islam) and purporting to lead a global war on "terrorism"? Tim is an atheist with a published record of advocating atheist thought including online. The Pakistanis would legally execute him as a blasphemer and the Saudis would kill him as a "terrorist".

Muslims in Britain and elsewhere would argue they have a right to be protected from the incivility of denying their hateful fraud of Islam. They call blasphemy against Islam "Islamophobia", divisive, hate, and prejudice.

Frankly, everyone should hate the dead charlatan Mohamad and his hateful fraud of Islam. How are you going to have a "civil" Internet with no hate, when Islam hates us and Muslims insist on spreading it? As long as Islam continues to exist, Tim cannot possibly succeed, and even when Islam ends (long overdue), people will find other reasons to hate each other.

curious2 says

The Guardian report sounds optimistic to the point of delusion. It quotes Tim saying, "“Humanity connected by technology on the web is functioning in a dystopian way. We have online abuse, prejudice, bias, polarisation, fake news, there are lots of ways in which it is broken. This is a contract to make the web one which serves humanity, science, knowledge and democracy." The Guardian paraphrase claims the contract "will protect people’s rights online from threats such as...prejudice and hate" and enabling users "to build communities that respect civil discourse and human dignity...to fight for an open web that is “a global public resource for people everywhere”."

If that was the case, anything to do with Islam would be banned, because Islam is the mother lode of everything the Guardian does not approve of.

And who defines what is discrimination, right or wrong? Men hating feminists, reparation seekers, gay rights activists, muslim apologists? Tim clearly does not understand human nature.