@orthzar @AnnaAdams @sllpodcast @StatismIsCancer @RebelWithACausePod @stuntpope @skepticaldeist @bigl0af and of course @LRN_FM and many others.

User discovery has got to be one of the weakest points of mastodon so hopefully this is useful.

Minor correction, sorry it was Gateway Pundit who made the leap to "UN 10% Global Tax to Fight CoronaVirus" (shared 3.2K times on Facebook?) Nice job @gatewaypundit@twitter.com

I really HATE it when people leap to idiotic conclusions and report it as "news" and people just blindly cobble it and run with it. Do you *want* to provide a viable alternative to the MSM? Then don't report crap like this as news.

END RANT 10/10

There is a single mention of funding in the actual report, which is "[supporting] governments by contributing to the COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund."

That's it. No global tax. No 10% tax. It's really just a call for a big policy response and they want via their fund 9/10

The word "tax" appears three times in the report, and they are all in the context of incentives, rebates and abatements. In fact the original @LifeSite@twitter.com article even quotes one of these passages.


It is LifeSite, in their own headline, that draws the line from the creation of this fund and the desire to allocate 10% global GDP toward a policy response and says "UN wants a 10% global tax for their fund"


Yet, even the LifeSite article itself, never actually says that, it just quotes excerpts from a recent UN report calling for a global response in the amount of 10% of global GDP, and that the UN has established a fund to marshal resources for a global response.


The headline of the article is:

"United Nations wants 10% of entire planet’s annual income in fund for coronavirus response"

and pretty soon everybody citing the article has simply distilled it down to "UN wants 10% global tax to fight "


"The proposed plan would effectively place a global agency, presumably the UN itself, in charge of propping up the economies of the world during the coronavirus crisis, placing it in charge of 10% of global income."


They all point back to some place called "LifeSiteNews" which I'm unfamiliar with (@LifeSite@twitter.com) and in their article they state:


No, the UN is not calling for a "10% Global Tax" to fight .

Just saw that "news" traverse my twitter feed and of course when I search on it, all sources reporting it are non-mainstream and not even semi respectable indie outlets.

Here's why: 1/10

RT @easyDNS
Obviously, we have to reconsider using @klaviyo@twitter.com. Appreciate the fast action to rectify, but it simply won't do to have a vendor shut us down b/c of an automated content filter.

We should be taking our own advice (Cobbler's children, etc...) 4/4 easydns.com/blog/2019/10/22/un

RT @easyDNS
This basically goes back to our book, - when you use a centralized email service like Klaviyo, like @Mailchimp@twitter.com (who will shut down your account if the right person *tweets* them telling them to), you are putting yourself at their whim 2/

RT @easyDNS
I understand using automated screening processes. We do that too. But you have to also factor in account history and past dynamics and at a worst case, you flag an item for review, you don't just nuke the account.... 3/

RT @easyDNS
@klaviyo@twitter.com shut down our account because this week's contained the phrase "Bitcoin Payments". It was an automated process.

What wasn't automated: The fact that we've had an account with them for something like five years and that we pay them over $1,000 / month. 1/

Yes, government overreach *is* a huge problem (the economic policy response practically guarantees an inflation shock, plus there is no such thing as a "temporary" government program)

But you can't address these issues by pretending the underlying catalyst isn't real. 7/7

Show more

Clean, civil, clueful Mastodon instance for easyDNS members, techies and weirdos.