Reminder [USA]: The fight against age verification is still on!
Just got off the phone with my Colorado representative. I reminded him that:
- Everyone knows Meta lobbied for these laws
- Everyone knows it's not "for the children"
- My friends and neighbors care about privacy and we are watching how you vote
- A vote for age verification is a clear indicator that you work for corporations and not constituents
You don't have to live in Colorado to get involved! If your state is blue or light blue on this map, you are under threat of age verification laws!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_m…
NOW is the time to call/email/write to your state legislators. Don't say, "Yeah, I should do that." Just do it and do it today, because they could surprise vote on it tomorrow.
64bithero
in reply to ki9 • • •I hope a phone call matters I hope speaking up matters. But to me unless the phone call comes with money I’m not sure how much these representatives cares.
Not saying it’s better to do and say nothing. I just wonder if these greedy pricks really are listening. And yes they are almost all greedy pricks…
sidebro
in reply to 64bithero • • •UnimportantHuman
in reply to 64bithero • • •☂️-
in reply to 64bithero • • •they are not. we usually make these things happen by pressuring them directly in other more tangible ways.
no easy answer to this one, i'm afraid. the modern surveillance stuff is unprecedented, so we will have to figure out what that is.
orc girly
in reply to 64bithero • • •ki9
in reply to 64bithero • • •One phone call doesn't make a difference, just like one vote or one protester. But they will notice a flood of voicemails and letters if they care about re-election.
I have been thinking about this... if they lobbyists pay a better severance package than the government, politicians won't care about re-election. So, it is just a matter of how much. This is why we pay politicians so much salary... so they'll want the job enough to work for their re-election and not need to take side money. And I think the lobbyists can't afford to buy them outright because they'd have to cover all the future lobbyist money that the politician would have made if re-elected.
As such, I like term limits, but I'm realizing that they create lame ducks. If we had a one-term limit for president, the sitting president would never be accountable to voters.
chicken
in reply to ki9 • • •osanna
in reply to ki9 • • •quick_snail
in reply to ki9 • • •irmadlad
in reply to ki9 • • •If it were genuinely 'for the children' then we would mandate, with heavy penalties, that parents be parents and take responsibility for their child's actions on and off line. I'm not sure why we drifted away from this. You bring a child into this world, you're responsible for them for the entire 18 years of boot camp.