i wanted to take some time to review and reflect, and i cannot bring myself to the same conclusion. as you said, the mandate does not exist yet. plus, this fascist regime has invented new ways of losing in the courts because they simply don’t have total control yet. bluesky has the resources to fight for their users right in court. by choosing not to wait for a court order or even put up a minimal legal resistance, they complied in advance. to me, their decision to remove these posts or ban these accounts reflects not a requirement to comply, but instead company values. they thought it would be easier and cheaper to roll over. i think this is ultimately the underlying flaw of for-profit media companies so i’m not surprised, and the conclusion i reach is that with a for profit media company, i am the product. as the product, i can refuse to have my attention sold to the highest bidder as an “impression.” if i don’t like fascism, i don’t use bluesky. so i don’t
artyom@piefed.social 5 days ago
It does.
They don’t.
Quill7513@slrpnk.net 5 days ago
then why restore the posts and accounts? why did you say the mandate would exist soon instead of already? and yes. the absolutely have the money to hire a lawyer and put forward the legal deposits to challenge this in court. any company with more than 50 employees not approaching bankruptcy filings does
artyom@piefed.social 5 days ago
You’re mixing up various timelines. There is the date it was signed into law, and the date it was enforced, and these are both in the past. BSky enacted this between the 2.
It would be a waste of money. There’s no way a scrappy startup wins a lawsuit of that scale against a state government or especially even an international one.
cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
That delicious leather-rubber-mud taste.