Lonestar brought up a worthy question recently: should Politico be added to the proscribed sources list? I wanted to give my thoughts on it and put it out there for discussion.
My thoughts:
I have never favored "censoring" news sources. The current members of the list are either deliberate hoax sites, or ones that promulgate pure woo. (Of course there is the handful that cannot even be mentioned.)
I cannot STAND the pure Marxist drivel promulgated by them.
We have several categories of "proscribed": banned content, will be moved immediately, and will be moved "after awhile."
If we added Politico, I'd vote for it to be in the "moved immediately" group.
HOWEVER, occasionally they post something worth reading. Rare, true, but once in a while.
The caveat: We don't want to "ban" so many news sources that all we're left with are Breitbart, Bongino (replaced Drudge, who went liberal) and Fox.
So, let me know what you think.
My thoughts:
I have never favored "censoring" news sources. The current members of the list are either deliberate hoax sites, or ones that promulgate pure woo. (Of course there is the handful that cannot even be mentioned.)
I cannot STAND the pure Marxist drivel promulgated by them.
We have several categories of "proscribed": banned content, will be moved immediately, and will be moved "after awhile."
If we added Politico, I'd vote for it to be in the "moved immediately" group.
HOWEVER, occasionally they post something worth reading. Rare, true, but once in a while.
The caveat: We don't want to "ban" so many news sources that all we're left with are Breitbart, Bongino (replaced Drudge, who went liberal) and Fox.
So, let me know what you think.
Last edited: