Posted on 06/28/2018 11:37:56 AM PDT by 100American
“Any user can add any of their friends to one of those groups without the friend’s approval, generating a status update showing that the friend has been added to that group.”
Who knows who added mark?
This article is 8 years old- has FB changed their groups/friends policy since then? I’ve not been on FB so am not clear on changes.
Hard to tell by looking, is he an M or a B?
The article is also poorly constructed.
‘Bad, had journalist.’
RE: . Forbes did a great service and if you can’t see the forest through the trees regarding this specific instance then go sell your whine somewhere else.
I am not whining about the content of the article, I am whining about the DECEPTIVE title implying that Zuckerberg sought membership at NAMBLA.
There are many ways to word the title without implying that he is a paedophile or a supporter of the group.
And no I won’t take my whine elsewhere. It belongs here.
If, according to Z’s own platform, Z is a member of NAMBLA, then a headline stating that is perfectly appropriate.
And given what we know already about elites and child sex trafficking, I’d wager the truth about Zuckerberg is far far worse than anyone can imagine.
1. The Obama administration had a senior official who advocated loosening social mores and legal restrictions on adult - teen sex.
2. The Clinton administration had a senior official who advocated loosening social mores and legal restrictions on adult - teen sex.
3. Germany has an active adult-child sex advocacy group.
4. The American Psychiatric Association has members and contributors arguing with clinical and academic papers that adult - child sex should be normalized.
5. How popular is Woody Allen and his movies?
6. How popular is Walt Whitman and his poetry?
7. I attend occasionally a singer-songwriter performance. Perhaps 70 people attend these things. On one occasion, a literature professor at the University of Mary Washington was one of the performers. He had written a song about Walt Whitman's love affair with a young Civil War soldier. He explained it. Adult Walt Whitman. Teenage boy soldier. Love. Sexual desire if not sexual performance. Nobody in the room missed the point that this homosexual college professor and songwriter was singing lovingly about Walt Whitman's homosexual longings and fondness for the boy. Everybody applauded. Hooray!
8. Go to the NAMBLA site.
9. Homosexual normalization is complete.
10. Homosexual marriage is widely normalized in viewpoint, and at least for now, legally normalized. You can see here and there the beginnings of the attempts to desensitize us to the issue of pederasty.
Zuck is not really a human....he’s a robot.
FB is a creation of, and run by, Deep State.
I guess they programmed him to be a fag sex robot too.
Suck built walls around a part of Hawaii where the natives had always wandered freely... fencing in is taboo, evil, ugly in Kauai. I’ve seen the fence. It’s seriously creepy.
We deffo need to go to gab when the shtf around here. I got my gab account now. Mebbe we can encourage people on FB to go over there next time it happens. I also don’t like that when we have to go to fakebook we doxx ourselves.
I think he looks like a statue. Algore looks like a tree. Xuckerburg looks like a greek statue. White and cold.
This is why they deserve our prayers and help. They have endured intense psychological pain and it needs to be dealt with. They can be helped. Letting them carry with their abnormal lifestyle does them no good.
Mark Zuckerberg Joins The North American Man-Boy Love Association, And Other Adventures In Facebook
I'm no Zuckerberg fan, but that was one of the most cheap shot misleading titles I've seen.
North
American
Marlon
Brando
Look
Alikes
See? Much ado about nothing.
No you cannot add anyone to a group as it was then, that has been changed
There are still NAMBLA pages up as groups on Facebook, I just checked. Some are open to join, in other cases you have to request it. Been that way for many groups for awhile. also there is a recent article questioning just what Facebook keeps in their data stores even if offline or secreted. Unless you ask to have all your data remove they keep it all. I was a member of a study group on Hebrew Bible roots and they finally left Facebook as they were being harassed on content about the Bible and Torah!
Last, if it had no legs then Forbes would have pulled it down under pressure from Facebook. It is still there on Forbes site, take from that what you will. But private groups by request only and hidden have existed there for a long time
Either way, Facebook steals your info and pictures, it’s in the EULA and only since regulations changed have they allowed you to delete it all. They moved 1.5 Billion files over to the US to try and avoid GDPR regs and got called on it.
And the title was from Forbes, not me, take it up with them
“””Blogger Michael Arrington seems to have already performed a helpful proof-of-concept by adding Mark Zuckerberg to a group supposedly representing NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association. Zuckerberg’s addition to the group is broadcast to all of his friends, as shown in the image above.”””
Zuck IS a member of nambla since the blogger signed him up, so technically, the title is true. Zuck just didn’t sign himself up, someone else did it for him. That’s the whole problem outlined in the article.
Well? Who’s going to answer the ultimate question? Did he join as a man, or as a boy?
So "Q" is johnny on the spot on an article printed in Forbes?.......
Sounds to me like anyone who reads Forbes would already be hip to the article.............LOL!
At the time the article was written, you could add other people’s names to your group without them taking any action on their own.
Further, the Forbes writer did address this accurately, but then he or his editor went on to put that terribly misleading headline on it.
The NAMBLA joining mischaracterization, is a very charged accusation. It carries a lot of negative things along with it. Despite my dislike for Zuckerberg, it was clearly an unprofessional and likely actionable move to place that title on the article.
I agreed with another poster who seemed to be telling you the same thing. I tried to point out the Forbes error to you, concerning the situation in the time frame of the article being published, 2010.
You in turn have tried to tell me what Facebook is like today. That isn’t the issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.