←back to thread

763 points tartoran | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
1. SoftTalker ◴[] No.45682562[source]
Not that I know, but I could imagine that a public/anonymous form on the web (if that's what it was) was receiving 99.8% bot/garbage/spam/nuisance reports and they took it down for that reason. Though nothing in the article gives that as a reason, and quotes only the rather vague statement that "the US State Department insisted it was continuing to receive reports regarding gross violations of human rights and was engaging with "credible organisations" on a full spectrum of human rights concerns."
replies(1): >>45682618 #
2. nerdponx ◴[] No.45682618[source]
I'm actually more surprised that they didn't abuse it, instead of removing it. Remember when Trump's first FCC commissioner ran a public comment campaign on net neutrality, and then heavily botted it to make it look like people were more strongly opposed than they actually were? Remember when there were zero consequences for that? I guess removing it makes a stronger statement.
replies(1): >>45682804 #
3. actionfromafar ◴[] No.45682804[source]
The time for nudging and manipulation is apparently over. It's more like "the sky is green, who do you believe, me or your lying eyes? We got 20 trillion dollars from foreign countries. Obey."