TidaLWaveZ

Let the games begin! Everyone start spamming inappropriate comments on all the videos of any youtubers that you don't like! On a serious note this decision was made with the consequences taken into consideration to make youtube less liable and more profitable at the expense of it's creators and viewers.

? On a wired connection!? The only thing I can think of that you haven't listed is updating the router firmware.

Money has no feelings.

@Gal W I had this problem using the 5Ghz option on my old router, I was forced to switch to the 2.4ghz to get stable wifi. I never pinpointed the exact issue but I'm almost certain that other devices like phones, tablets, etc were causing signal interference on an already lower frequency signal.

I'd personally never take his advice at face value. He definitely has his own motives, I mean infowars sells health supplements for christ sakes. The only thing I support about infowars(and everyone) in this situation is the right to disperse their content without interference by social media. I guess I understand your criticism of viewpoints that he injects but the documentary contains at least an hours worth of raw footage of the events including the full ritual, it's basically indisputable evidence of what happens. Should of guessed the resident armchair extremist would rush in. "FaceBook is a private entity. The can block whatever the f**k they want." That means they can allow whatever they want as well... I noticed you targeted all opposition views while failing to criticize the OP, who made this thread criticizing Facebook for allowing infowars material. XDDD

Susan Wojcicki has overstayed her welcome by about 4 years.

Agree, this is like banning the tabloid magazines at the grocery. Infowars has plenty of crazy nonsense, but they also have plenty non conspiracy theory content involving politics, etc. Hell, look at Alex Jones documentary inside Bohemian Grove, that documentary alone proves that Jones is not 100% full of shit, though I'd believe he's close to 70%. Furthermore conspiracy theories and fake news are mutually exclusive by definition. If a conspiracy theory were proven incorrect, in which fake news must be, then it is no longer a conspiracy theory. Exactly, any blocking of media sources for news(bogus or not) is basically public thought control no matter how trivial the outlet.

RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA Love, The Left

I'll just post the same thing again since you seem to ignore it and instead criticize my comprehension of statistics, which was addressed in my first sentence. Nobody is arguing that London is a deadlier place than New York City in general. I'm just providing a real life example of strict gun laws not being the end all answer.

Not in the first three months of 2018. Nobody is arguing that London is a deadlier place than New York City in general. I'm just providing a real life example of strict gun laws not being the end all answer.

I mean the topic is really tech companies hopping on the gun control wagon. What other comparison do I have than a nearly identical city in a place with very strict gun control?

Not when the cities have nearly identical largel populations, it's more apples to apples.

No, the original stat is quarter 1 2018 London’s Metropolitan Police launched 46 murder inquiries in the first three months of 2018 – including 15 in February and 22 in March. That is roughly double the number seen in the first quarter of last year and, in the latter two months, more than in New York, a city of comparable size. It is the first time in modern history that London’s homicide rate, which has grown nearly 40 per cent in three years, has been higher than New York’s. The point of me using this comparison is to point out that stricter gun laws don't unconditionally equate to less murder.