Why is Mark Zuckerberg such an overly sensitive piece of excrement

>>139074138
>buds report it
nice buds

>>139074138
This was a lot of effort compared to that shitty image

>>139074299
They reported to see if it got the new account banned as well. It was a test. So yes, they are nice buds.

Obviously your (((friends))) are great!

>>139074599
well you'd probably get banned for ban evasion regardless of the pic

>>139074138
FB is shit, did'nt you know?

Mark Zuckerberg isn't even real. He is a made up person who was the emblem of the globalists.

He is Rothschild descendant.

>>139074815
The friends who I asked to report it weren't in the Trump group where I originally posted.

>>139074138

>that extraordinarily lengthy tantrum

stop whining ya cunt

>>139074138
>facebook is terrible
A surprise to literally no one anywhere.

>>139074138
They banned you for sexual content, nothing to do with zucc

>>139075714
What sexual content? I never posted any.

>>139074138
There is no such thing as a right to free speech on a private platform.

>>139076488
Retard look at your picture

>>139076706
Hey retard, people post way worse and never get banned.

>>139076682
Agreed. But it def shows lack of character. And I'm surprised no one seems to realize how dangerous it is that the worlds most powerful social media platform believes in such insane censorship.

File: alwellnow.jpg (55KB, 648x486px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 648x486px

>>139074138
>be you
>go on a website provided to you for free and without any effort on your part as long as you agree to the conditions
>one of the conditions is you can get banned for any reason OR no reason
>get/make hard to read meme mocking the owner/main guy of the very same site
>shook.jpg
>try again thinking they'll let you have a place on their digital lawn because muh free speech
>admit all the other stuff to friends, get them involved
>same.avi

Why would you be surprised about what happened?

>>139078981

Lets try this in not the online world.

>Muslim walks into coffee shop
>Owner doesnt like Muslims
>Kicks muslims out
>Government shuts down store
>Rioter burn down the remains

See how that works?

>>139078981
I didn't expect them to be so thin skinned. They don't ban you for threatening the Prez, but they do for teasing the Zucc.

File: ryanashleyislooking.jpg (54KB, 488x465px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 488x465px

>>139079366

The muslim didn't insult the owner or manager specifically. Why would the rioter burn down the remains?

>>139074138
>waaaaaaah, why won't private enterprises tolerate muh low IQ shitposting on their private servers?!? This is an attack on muh freeze peach!!

File: IMG_6808.png (1KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 400x400px

>>139079681

File: billings.jpg (2MB, 2848x4288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2848x4288px

>>139079591

That's exactly the point. They've been informed they don't like the President so they don't bother to moderate it. Giving you a voice to criticize a powerful person from the very same site is not something they would allow. Especially with how easy it is for them to stop you without loss to them.

Would you stand for someone putting a sign with a picture of you getting banged out for not mowing your lawn?

>>139080101
If I were in his position, I'd see it as part of the job.

File: priustinyhouse.jpg (110KB, 650x1000px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 650x1000px

>>139080319

Have you tried this on any other venue to see what the ban factor is? Would hi5 or friendster ban you for the same pic? How long would it take? Don't bother with pintrest though, it will make you want to do arts and crafts at your house that don't look like the pictures.

>>139080026
There is no point here, you broke the TOS and got your ass handed. All sites run some sort of moderation and stick to certain rules, because otherwise it would be chaos, if you cannot abide by them you will get the boot.

What's so hard to grasp?

In 10 years the latest generation of useless idiots will consider Jewbook to be for old people and losers.

They'll all be on some VR tinder type bullshit virtually fucking each other.

>>139078237
So what, if anything, are you advocating as a solution? I mean there are troublesome implications to statutorily limiting a company's ability to control its own platform, or to more extreme solutions like trust busting internet companies.

>>139074138
Ah. Homophobic photoshooping. Whatever will we do without vaginas. Log onto Faceberg maybe
>married to an asian woman
>probably has kids
>is a fag
Who isn't, then?

>>139080727
Ok. It's fine to threaten the Prez, and make racist comments about whites, etc on FB. But teasing the Zucc is unacceptable. Yeah. I got it. Lol.

>>139081422
Are you implying those posts don't get deleted due to an agenda? Prove it

You can find anti zuckerberg memes like the one you posted in FB, and "racist comments about whites", their system is not infallible.

>>139074138
Report all the sanctioned ANTIFA pages and watch how nothing happens.
I reported all of them and got a response back that nothing violated FB policy.

>>139082035
So, zuckerberg is, dare I say, /ourguy/? Nice!

>>139081864
If the Zucc allows those type of memes, then why ban me over it?

>>139083674
They aren't allowed, yours just got reported while the others did not.

The only reason why your thread stayed up here was because you got banned from FB after posting it, if this thread had a different topic you'd get banned for posting this in /pol/

I've been banned for posting less inflammatory images on /pol/