ty for clarifying that.
Iâd add to my initial post that i think people are overreacting.
If Mozilla had a mechanism for preventing Firefox users from visiting the Dissenter website altogether, then youâd have a point to complain about.
I can just about agree with people saying thereâs some hypocrisy or double standards potentially emerging with the blocking / banning of the Dissenter extension.
However, people are not prevented from using the site, so all thatâs happened is that some ease of use has been reduced.
One poster referred to a knee jerk reaction by Mozilla. Comments like ââŚthe modern world makes a dramatic left turn towards totalitarianismâ exemplify this just as much. The last time i looked nationalism is on the ascendancy internationally. Certainly in Europe, parties that were fringe and low-presence are gaining ground in mainstream politics.
Just for balance, Iâd recognise that the Labour Party in the UK, which has been centralist IMO for quite some time has become much more left wing internally. More importantly, they jump on anyone who dares to question their status quo and the partyâs leader, who is more socialist than weâve had for decades. I donât object to the socialism. I object to being silenced if i have anything which is considered critical to the party line.
Letâs be honest. It wasnât banned because of âhate speechâ. Thatâs just something far left companies like Mozilla say to censor and block people from speaking.
The hate and intolerance is all coming from the far left today. They are the most violent, hateful group of people Iâve ever met. So glad Trump won.
My wife and I will be uninstalling Firefox and will not use your browser again until you stop censoring and bullying people. This is America not 1930s Germany.
Mozilla/Firefox has been and will continue going downhill due to terrible leadership and losing touch of their values and roots. Everyone should switch to a fork like Waterfox/IceCat/Palemoon or heck Brave is decent. Free speech plugins like this are good, allowing people to freely communicate, even if they are âtoxicâ ideas. Worst case, just keep scrolling or call them out. The marketplace of ideas is great allowing you this power to debate people if you desire.
1 Like
Iâve been a Firefox-user for almost 20 years, and a Free and Open Internet also means that no group of âGroupThinkâ can decide what I want to read or what to watch.
At school in history-class we had to read the most terrible texts; from dictators, from people within the regim, and how they justified those things. Youâre plan is to ban it all? Or let a lone be talked about it?
Iâm switching to Brave. This is a disgrace to and open internet.
The core of this issue (just like the armagaddon-2 problem) is the decision to put central control on add-ons. The fact that the central control is an legal entity in California, USA has political implications, namely that add-ons which are at odds with American law or California culture are less likely to be signed.
My concern at the time that central control was imposed was that extensions could be denied due to DMCA, but I donât know if any example exists of this.
People might be able to still visit the site with Firefox (for nowâŚ), but they are prevented from using Dissenter the way it is designed to work.
Its like defending that removing the UI of the OS from your customers is perfectly fine because everything under the hood is still intact.
Look instead for words such as free expression. Youâll find the Manifesto, to which someone referred before you couldnât find the exact phrase free speech. Mozilla is, amongst other things:
committed to an internet that promotes civil discourse, human dignity, and individual expression.
For me, the Manifesto was the third search result.
Not so.
Hereâs a screenshot of Mozilla Firefox to show that no user of Dissenter has used Dissenter to comment upon this topic Iâm not prevented from using Dissenter in the sidebar:
Is this not how Dissenter intended the extension to work with Firefox?
No comment (in the sidebar) from me because Iâm not a user of the service.
Have you taken into account the pages being commented on?
Sure, Censorship of the right has taken on massive proportions and so there are a lot of people with right-wing ideologies on Dissenter that would otherwise no longer be able to speak freely and they are over-represented in the top articles on the Dissenter page.
However, it is just as impossible to judge the content of Dissenter as a whole as it is to judge the content of Google, Twitter, or Facebook, or the pages visited with Firefox as a whole. Your experience is limited to the articles you go to and not the articles that are commented on by others.
If the Dissenter-comment is attached to a political article then of course comments will be more likely to be political as well, but if the comment is attached to a completely different topic then this is simply not the case.
Perhaps some people enjoy leaving notes at cooking articles with flavor enhancing tips, or perhaps someone reads a dangerous DIY article and would like to leave a warning, or perhaps leave a âthank youâ-note on a page they really liked. There can be tons of reasons for wanting to leave a digital post-it note, and none of them has anything to do with political color.
*correction. No one has commented to your comment 57 in this thread. Remove the /57 from the address and youâll see comments.
I think I might have misinterpreted you though and thought your argument was that as long as people are able to go to the Dissenter.com page and add urls to the string, they would still be able to comment without the add-on itself. Which they could indeed, but which would not be user-friendly.
1 Like
Warning: Mozilla has updated its add-on policies and is now proactively blocking extensions (as of v60.x+) that are found to be in violation of their policies (Dissenter) by disabling extensions or other third-party software that has already been installed by Firefox users.
blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/05/02/add-on-policy-and-process-updates/
Thanks, I see them now.
Three of four comments and I canât guess why one of them is hidden by the service.
Incidentally this is a normal installation of a release of Firefox. Not a developer preview or anything like that:
Re: the comment about prevention, am I missing something?
I simply installed a signed extension. No prevention.
But according to their own posts, this is going to happen.
âAdd-on or extension blocking (sometimes referred to as âblocklistingâ), is a method for disabling extensions or other third-party software that has already been installed by Firefox users.â
âWe will be blocking extensions more proactively if they are found to be in violation of our policiesâ
https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/05/02/add-on-policy-and-process-updates/
âThis extension does not comply with Mozillaâs Acceptable Use Policyâ
I just now used this browser thing called âFirefoxâ to visit some extreme websites.
Extreme political views, videos of people dying, animal cruelty, anti-vaxxer, pro abortion, nudity, itâs all accessable on this browser!!! How is it possible that this âFirefoxâ is interested in facilitating bigotry and ignorance???
They should ban this thing or something. Banning is good, because that promotes âopenness, innovation & opportunityâ.
Users are not âpreventedâ from using Dissenter in the way itâs supposed to work. Ease of functionality has been reduced. You can search for threads to comment on. You can post any URL you wish to comment on.
The website appears to function fine in my firefox.
You are overstating the problem.
It is not like youâre operating in a command line environment.
I would still agree one could ask questions about Mozilla banning extensions.
However, for example, what would you do if there was an extension which allowed one to search for bomb making ingredients or components? Would you permit that?
hi olav
i said mozilla are NOT interested in facilitating bigotry and ignorance.
regards
1 Like
i will be moving to brave, thanks for bending to the far left minority sjws,
i had use ur browser for 5 years now and even supported you, not anymore.
Once the Dissenter add-on is prevented from working on Firefox completely then users that would want to use it will have to enter
âhttps://dissenter.com/discussion/begin?url=â in the address bar and add the address they want to see behind that. Sure, its no command-prompt yet, but its not user-friendly either.
As for your question if services that allow you to search for bombs online should be banned? Of course Google and other search-engines should not get banned!