What if we win?

[Laminus]

Van Jones presented an interesting question to the National Conference on Media Reform. "Are we ready for our own success?" In jest he suggested the dogs of Rumsfeld attribute the failures in Iraq to the US' lack of preparedness for its cataclysmic victory. The US victory was so swift the scum of Bush were caught unaware and stumbled in their strategy. Though this assessment is clearly incorrect and sarcastic, it bears consideration against the League of Reason's own motivation and objectives.

Does the League have an agenda? Does the anti-censorship community have an agenda? Tube Guardian has rolled off the production line dealing a heavy blow to the pukes who votebot. Are we prepared for victory? Can we properly capitalize on these successes to advance our agendas?

 

[JacobEvans]

We aren't a conspiracy last time I checked, nor do we have any type of "agenda".
The question is irrelevant.

 

[stratos]

We aren't a conspiracy last time I checked, nor do we have any type of "agenda".
The question is irrelevant.

Of course there are agendas, saying people don't have agendas is like saying people don't have goals or underlying motivations. Also Laminus didn't say the league was a conspiracy, so that's a bit of an empty argument.

However, while I think the question is a valid one, I don't think LoR is organised enough to actually plan and execute a strategy, while small groups of people within could perhaps do that, trying to get everyone to do that would be like herding cats. The only strategies LoR can put into motion on a larger scale are those that that work well via lead by example.

On another note, you can't have victory if you don't define it. So while it may be true that tube guardian can successfully protect videos, how does that mean victory? It just means that down-voting is no longer a effective strategy. Which could even lead to perhaps more DMCA notices since that still works as a strategy for them.

 

[CosmicSpork]

I would say the only "agenda" we might have is for YouTube and other such companies to take censorship seriously and fix the flaws in their system(s). LoR was never intended to be turned into some sort of army or anything, but to simple help draw attention to the blatently flawed mechanisms that allow people to censor others for expressing their opinion or providing facts and information that people have every right to be able to access.

LoR as it is, is simply a public community which can give people a platform to express themselves and expose those who wish to censor information when there is no call for it. Like false DMCA's, votebotting, false flagging, and disinformation...

TubeGuardian is the result of this collective input, josh could see that it was a big problem and that something needed to be done so he set to work. It wasn't until later that he approached LoR, at which point we offered our support seeing that this tool had potential to help people as well as hopefully open YouTube's eyes and eventually render TubeGuardian unnecessary. Until that happens action like this will be necessary...

That's all I have to say at the moment, sorry if I have rambled, I am still in bed and only just woke up

 

[stratos]

I would say the only "agenda" we might have is for YouTube and other such companies to take censorship seriously and fix the flaws in their system(s). LoR was never intended to be turned into some sort of army or anything, but to simple help draw attention to the blatently flawed mechanisms that allow people to censor others for expressing their opinion or providing facts and information that people have every right to be able to access.

LoR as it is, is simply a public community which can give people a platform to express themselves and expose those who wish to censor information when there is no call for it. Like false DMCA's, votebotting, false flagging, and disinformation...

TubeGuardian is the result of this collective input, josh could see that it was a big problem and that something needed to be done so he set to work. It wasn't until later that he approached LoR, at which point we offered our support seeing that this tool had potential to help people as well as hopefully open YouTube's eyes and eventually render TubeGuardian unnecessary. Until that happens action like this will be necessary...

That's all I have to say at the moment, sorry if I have rambled, I am still in bed and only just woke up

Reading my comment back it does seem to suggest I think of LoR as a fixed group of people. That is perhaps something I should have made clear because you are of course 100% right in saying that that isn't so.

However even if you have a loose group of people. some who might not even identify themselves as being LoR, you can describe their actions as those of a group. What I was talking about was basically a abstraction of the two groups. When I said that LoR wasn't organised, I actually meant formally organised, as in, there is no organisation, there is no actual fixed group, just a loose group of people with a similar goal. Which of course, you can only lead by example, because of the copy-cat nature of people.

It might seem over dramatised to speak in words like "groups" and "goals" and "strategies", but those are just tools to analyse what is happening and what possible outcomes could be.