I think I've fixed it, and the feed should update with a few posts missing from the past few days!

I suspect it's to do with how I'm capturing that, since it picked this post up 🤣 I'll have a look later today!

To be clear, the new laws punish employers who *intentionally* underpay their staff, so won't apply to those that "want to do the right thing".

> "[The new laws] will add yet another layer of complex and burdensome regulation on business, especially small business.

Yeah, it's really complex and burdensome to not intentionally underpay your employees. 🙄

I'm around from Wednesday before until Tuesday after hunt - will put these (and anything else you'd recommend ❤️) on the list to see!

Nope, but I would call it "labelling".

Also, I have to correct your post: "not liking what you post" is not, in itself, a reason to be labelled intolerant - I assume it was an innocent mischaracterisation of the rules, TERFather. Here's some of the things that you can actually be labelled or banned for.

I would call this post of yours labelling all people who use this left wing and extremists, so maybe you do, in fact, do it:

bsky.app/profile/terf...

If you, Terfather, have no idea why you might be labelled intolerant, I can't help you.

And yes, you don't label stuff you don't agree with, because you don't run this website. In your house, you can make the rules.

Finally, it's wild that someone, promoting so-called free speech and to whom labels are apparently the worst thing that can ever happen, is content to call someone blocking them "fleeing", someone disagreeing with them "not very bright", and chalking it up as a win.

Even if you have a legal freedom of speech where you are (check, because not everyone does everywhere for every reason), that's not the same as a right to be heard or welcomed everywhere. Unless you have laws compelling companies to allow you to express views anytime without limit, you likely don't.

It's especially fine if you believe that that's the level of the emergency that this has reached. However, being told by a single website that its moderators believe your content is intolerant? Please. It's the same as being told by a restaurant that you're being too loud. 2/

Some further, later thoughts on equating things to the Holocaust or Apartheid: it is a thought-terminating comparison, not useful for any kind of reasoned discussion: the subject changes from whatever it is, to whether the comparison is apt. If that's what you actually want, then that's fine. 1/

In the case of Bluesky, I believe this is their "don't be too loud": bsky.social/about/suppor...

There doesn't need to be a sign there. If I invite friends to my home for dinner, I do not need to enumerate in advance every single behaviour that may result in me asking them to leave. I could just say "don't be too loud", without specifying the precise loudness permitted.

1/

It's a bit like this: you might have a yard sale, or another event at your home, where people are generally welcome. However, your property remains yours, and it is your absolute right to determine what is and is not acceptable, and who is and isn't welcome, despite the general invitation.

I think it strikes an appropriate balance between avoiding the paradox of tolerance, and censorship; I definitely don't agree that every platform must welcome every view, no matter how detestable.