We applaud Meta’s efforts to try to fix its over-censorship problem but will watch closely to make sure it is a good-faith effort and rolled out fairly and not merely a political maneuver to accommodate the upcoming U.S. administration change. eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/eff-…
EFF Statement on Meta's Announcement of Revisions to Its Content Moderation Processes
In general, EFF supports moves that bring more freedom of expression and transparency to platforms—regardless of their political motivation.Electronic Frontier Foundation
Mark Rosario
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Trit’
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •What do you think it is, actually? Of course, it’s only such a move to allow the nazi (MAGAs ARE nazis!) propaganda to be freely shared. What else it could be, seriously?
As the late Twitter before it, Facebook just became a nazi bar. That’s all.
Wilfried Klaebe reshared this.
Duncan Bayne
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Sheeb
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •kirakira
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Noxy 🐾
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •What basis do you have for assuming good-faith from Facebook?
I usually trust the EFF but this statement concerns me.
Lazarou Monkey Terror 🚀💙🌈 reshared this.
Hadley T. Canine (fox)
in reply to Noxy 🐾 • • •@noxypaws This statement should probably cause you to reevaluate your trust for the EFF. I don't think anybody, ever, has ever accused facebook of "over-moderation", except outright fascists.
What the absolute fuck, EFF?
Alexandra Lanes likes this.
Klotiii
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Shrig 🐌
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •CharLES ☭ H
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •kryptec
in reply to CharLES ☭ H • • •RussianDeepStateSock
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •you "applaud" any aspect of this? lmao you mean I have to keep an eye on EFF writers, as well? There is nothing to applaud here.
Did EFF applaud fascists attacking affirmative action because they said "it wasnt needed anymore"?
.: jdkiser :.
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Brian Hough
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Bolt
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •I have mixed feelings about this.
I understand that the EFF strives to support free speech online, which this technically supports, but the EFF should also understand better than anyone that platforms beholden to advertisers choosing to allow harmful content only results in the decline of that platform's revenue from losing advertisers, which almost always directly causes enshittification of the platform. (See: Twitter, or "X" I guess.)
Bolt
in reply to Bolt • • •Community notes can be valuable, and the fact the EFF is stating they support dual-mechanism systems for moderation, instead of exclusively one, makes sense, but the language and tone of this post feels like it's downplaying these effects.
Instead of going "they're replacing their existing system that could rely on actual fact-checkers and moderators with random people on the internet that MIGHT know what's right, and that's probably bad"
You said "maybe they'll be good in the future?"
Bolt
in reply to Bolt • • •Bolt
in reply to Bolt • • •I wholly understand the nuance you're going for, with the understanding that Meta still had issues with over-moderating other topics, or censoring for the sake of brand safety over all else, but I think you haven't exactly communicated this in a way that shows how much you truly wish for out of these companies.
This feels more like a corporate statement after a scandal than it does a proper critique of their new stance.
Rusty Corgi 🔜 FC
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Steve
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •James Cridland
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •EloPup
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •tobi (they/them) is writing bugs
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Lazarou Monkey Terror 🚀💙🌈
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Kees de Kooter 🍋🍉
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •:leafeon: :heart_trans:
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Wilmar Igl, PhD
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Dr. Seltsam 🌎🎶🌳
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •ꓤ uɐᗡ
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •no.
NO.
Jonathan Schofield
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •The Queen of Weltschmerz🏳️⚧️
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Nora Reed
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •j@mastodon
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •There you go less censorship
404media.co/facebook-deletes-i…
Meta is a rotten corporation, not a freedom fighting NGO. Everything they do is compromised and what you're signaling by your statement is trust in them? Are you for real?
Facebook Deletes Internal Employee Criticism of New Board Member Dana White
Jason Koebler (404 Media)Cairo Braga [toot.cb]
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •LAUREN
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •🆎
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Dan FitzGerald
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •other people have been more eloquent here, so I wont try to duplicate their reasoning. I'll just go straight to what I am feeling, in my gut. So, to whomever wrote this post:
Take a long walk off a short pier.
David Plisken 🏳️⚧️ BLM! 🇵🇸
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Donald Ball
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •…
Yeah, we knew you weren’t one on the good ones.
Ret
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •dushinto
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •dragonfrog
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •1) This is just an embarrassingly bad take and whoever wrote it should feel embarrassed, and
2) Meta has never had an "over censorship" problem. I have reported blatant racism, transphobia that was well into the territory of incitement to violence, recruitment fraud, ads for illegal drugs, smuggled cigarettes, and academic cheating services, medical advice that would kill people if they followed it, etc. etc. NOTHING has EVER been taken down. Only thing they ever take down is boobs.
v̾i̾t̾r̾i̾o̾l̾i̾x̾
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Whaladon Liberation Front
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Wilfried Klaebe
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Chad McCullough
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Misuse Case
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •jeana
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Danielle Foré
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •2something likes this.
Draken BlackKnight
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •RootWyrm 🇺🇦
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •this is the most insane, preemptive boot-licking, pro-fascist shit you could have possibly said. And exactly why I tell everybody who will listen to NOT donate to you, ensure their employer DOES NOT donate or support you, and treat you like the fascist-supporting org you have truly become.
Here's a free hint: Meta wasn't 'over-censoring,' or doing anywhere near enough, and you're just cheerleading for violent racism and disinformation.
John Wilker 👨🏽💻
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •This is a bad look. You’re familiar with Lucy, Charlie Brown and the football?
What in Facebook’s history would lead you to think there’s good faith to be had.
Sir Rochard 'Dock' Bunson
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •AlexTECPlayz
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Noxy 🐾
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •unlofl [Promoted Toot]
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Tek say resist
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •I love y'all. I’ve donated for ages both formally and throwing cash to your booths at various cons. I'm a fan and proud member.
But WTF. No. I can't think of a plausible way to describe Meta as "over-moderated”, nor can I think of a realistic scenario where they’ll actually do this in good faith.
If they want to earn a good reputation, they can begin by starting to act civilly for the first time ever. If that happens, and they keep it up for a few years, *maybe* then I’ll believe it.
2something likes this.
Walt Bobrowski
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Moss Wizard
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Cat
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •FoolishOwl
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Bas Schouten
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •2something likes this.
Stephen Mather
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •ShadSterling
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Akseli
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Mark Ohe
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •This is a shameful and pathetic response.
Phil Betts
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •jgeorge
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •nil
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Joe
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Milos
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Patrick H. Lauke
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Aral Balkan
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •rm -rf ./lee.mccat
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Allan
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Ronan
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •sneedy maccreedy
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Mike Farley
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •THOMnottom
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •thomkennon
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Wikinaut
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Matt Papakipos
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •wuppi
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Claudius
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Sascha Pallenberg 🇹🇼 ♻️ ⚡
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •J.P. Wing
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Dave Howcroft
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Pablo M.U.
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Sally Strange
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Corb_The_Lesser
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •SlightlyCyberpunk
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •mark
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •lampsofgold
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Why Do All These Homosexuals Keep Sucking My Cock?
The Onion Staff (The Onion)Victor Zambrano
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •The Shaking Earth
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •if you're buying this shit I have a bridge to sell you, too
god
the wide-eyed naivety of this statement
Niléane
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Mister Softie
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Sarah Brown
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • •like this
BoneHouseWasps🔶🇬🇧🇪🇺, Becky, Scott Richmond, Matthew Exon, Jake Hamby, Parade du Grotesque 💀 and Mike Grusin like this.
Jake Hamby reshared this.
Phantom Planet #1 Lawyer
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Eniko Fox
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Marta Threadbare
in reply to Eniko Fox • • •Bernie the Wordsmith
in reply to Marta Threadbare • • •Marta Threadbare
in reply to Bernie the Wordsmith • • •The Internet Is Not Facebook: Why Infrastructure Providers Should Stay Out of Content Policing
Electronic Frontier FoundationEniko Fox
in reply to Marta Threadbare • • •Lady Homealot 🖖not going back
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •FinchHaven
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •The #EFF has become nothing but a lapdog, a dutiful mouthpiece for the advance of global #Oligarchy and #Kleptocracy
For shame, for shame
Except that no one within the EFF has any shame
gz
in reply to FinchHaven • • •Wut?
Andrew
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Dorothea Salo
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •This absolute shitpile -- and similar; this is not the first time you've screwed the pooch this way -- is why I no longer support you financially.
You know why this is fucked up. Shame on you, and fix your hearts.
frlan
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •HowToPhil (Phillip R)
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •It is clearly a political maneuver
Jo
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Athena
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Electronic Frontier Foundation
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •like this
Matthew Exon and 2something like this.
J.P. Wing
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Oof, sounds like a certain org is getting hit in the pocketbook.
Trust less.
FinchHaven
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •So
You didn't do your homework and blew it completely
And now you're trying to cover your *ss
Not buying it
Not buying it for one second
Sally Strange
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Shrig 🐌
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Nora Reed
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •BashStKid reshared this.
Ash Greytree
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •ISPs Should Not Police Online Speech—No Matter How Awful It Is.
Electronic Frontier FoundationMister Softie
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •kirakira
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Donald Ball
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Buds, you said Facebook had an “over-censorship” problem.
Get fucked.
Lesley Carhart
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •The Milka Bull
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Bela Lugosi's Dad
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Normal Poster
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •F4GRX Sébastien
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Andrew Cook
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Steve Zakulec
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •The Shaking Earth
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Cairo Braga [toot.cb]
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •binchicken
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Biggles
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •i cannot believe that in the year 2025, you actually let someone basically write a 'no actually, we should hear the Nazis out, they might have good ideas' article.
You're fucking idiots if you think that granting such largess to demonstrably bad faith actors is going anywhere good.
You *do not* tolerate intolerance.
It's a social pact we make to tolerate others to ensure a peaceful society.
Break the pact, prepare to get whacked.
Sarah Grisham
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Fully operational gator system
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Good, I figured y'all just hadn't gotten the full picture.
To a lot of people, it seemed there for a moment y'all were going mask-off in support of social manipulation and corporate greed. A scary direction for the EFF.
Saying that to your Fedi audience... 😰
In today's day and age, it's not just what is censored but what is also promoted. Hate speech and factual misinformation were already rampant of the Meta platforms, as they are on the X platform. Social media companies are companies, they will follow what they think will bring them profit and follow what they believe the trend is. Right now, they believe far-right politicians represent their best interests and far-right ideology is trending. Therefore, it makes sense to calibrate their policies and algorithms to support those ideas.
If these platforms were neutral, removing this censorship would already be a pretty bad idea. These platforms definitely aren't neutral, and they already had tremendous issues with content related to hate speech before this decision.
Even 4chan has moderation,
... show moreGood, I figured y'all just hadn't gotten the full picture.
To a lot of people, it seemed there for a moment y'all were going mask-off in support of social manipulation and corporate greed. A scary direction for the EFF.
Saying that to your Fedi audience... 😰
In today's day and age, it's not just what is censored but what is also promoted. Hate speech and factual misinformation were already rampant of the Meta platforms, as they are on the X platform. Social media companies are companies, they will follow what they think will bring them profit and follow what they believe the trend is. Right now, they believe far-right politicians represent their best interests and far-right ideology is trending. Therefore, it makes sense to calibrate their policies and algorithms to support those ideas.
If these platforms were neutral, removing this censorship would already be a pretty bad idea. These platforms definitely aren't neutral, and they already had tremendous issues with content related to hate speech before this decision.
Even 4chan has moderation, it shouldn't be more moderated than the one service our collective grandparents were actually motivated to figure out how to use.
Jonbjohns
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Jonbjohns
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •PJB
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •you fucking idiots saw Zuck making an announcement full of blatant dogwhistles and decided to fucking cheer on him. Then went "whoops, we didn't expect this" when the obvious thing happened.
The only thing you can do to regain any reputation is to delete your post IMMEDIATELY and fucking write an apology explaining how you could possibly fuck up so much.
Dorothea Salo
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Yeah, no, wholly inadequate.
I don't see an apology here to all the people (myself included) you just threw under the hate bus.
We deserve one. An ABJECT one. Y'all seriously screwed the pooch. Own it and apologize.
Mister Softie
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Sara
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •I'm reminded of that time you bankrolled the legal defense of a jackass who'd harassed friends of mine
they were queer
I stopped donating at that point
you've been like this for a while
Red Oak
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Electronic Frontier Foundation
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Meta’s New Content Policy Will Harm Vulnerable Users. If It Really Valued Free Speech, It Would Make These Changes
Electronic Frontier FoundationMalachi17
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Ruth [☕️ 👩🏻💻📚✍🏻🧵🪡🍵]
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •it was a mistake to project good faith onto the company in this the year 2025?
8 years after the Rohingya genocide? You still gave them the benefit of the doubt?
Is there any kind of internal self-evaluation happening at the organization or even in your own heads asking yourselves why you made such a poor choice? In, and I cannot stress this enough…. 2025?
Pau Amma
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Steve
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •H.Kyllikki
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Joe
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Shrig 🐌
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Stop wasting your energy with this, apologise fully and meaningfully for your repeated naivety and trust for Meta and finally encourage its abandonment and suffocation while elevating its community owned alternatives
Shrig 🐌
in reply to Shrig 🐌 • • •CharLES ☭ H
in reply to Shrig 🐌 • • •@Shrigglepuss
"Over -censored" is a funny way to refer to fb's systemic queerphobia.
JoeBecomeTheSun
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Mx. Alex
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •no shit "it was a mistake to project good faith onto Meta", where you living under a rock this last decade?
I cannot believe I donated to your org at some point, you should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves.
Dorothea Salo
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Y'all will do or say anything to avoid OWNING YOUR SHIT, won't you?
Own. Your. Shit.
You've been simping for hate for a long time. Figure out how you're going to NOT DO THAT ANY MORE, apologize for doing it at all, and then don't do it again.
You get not one penny and not one word of praise from me until you fix your hearts and your practices.
nil
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •NadiaPurge
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •::slow, grim chuckle::
Libertarians love to pretend big corporations are good, actually.
So easily conned.
Confrontation Jacen
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Yann 不停 Heurtaux
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Reed Mideke
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •You applaud Zuck's transparent efforts to kiss Trump's ass? Really? How embarrassing for you.
"We sincerely hope that the lightened restrictions announced by Meta will apply uniformly, and not just to hot-button U.S. political topics"
LMAO, you can't be *that* gullible
"Censorship, broadly, is not the answer to misinformation"
Ah right, so Facebook could have avoided its role in the Rohingya genocide by… I dunno, community notes saying "some people think massacres are bad, actually"? 🤔
Log 🪵
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Tattie
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •so how much did Zuckerberg pay you to pen this bootlicking puff piece?
Just go ahead and change your user avatar to Pepe the frog like the rest of the "Free Speech (specifically and only for Nazis)" brigade.
Pau Amma
in reply to Tattie • • •Tattie
in reply to Pau Amma • • •Anarchic Teapot 🌹⚧️
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •And that's a "who the fuck do you think you're trying to fool" from me.
Moderation isn't censorship, it's enabling a fair playing-field.
da_667
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Steve Thompson PhD
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Death by Lambda
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •The only organisations that ever have a problem with "over-censorship" are #fascist organisations.
And if and when you applaud fascists, you are one.
#blocked
v0idness
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Dan Fixes Coin-Ops
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Richard Vasquez
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Seriously?
transparency.meta.com/policies…
Section "Tier 2". It's ok to dump on the mental health of gay or trans people?
What is wrong with you?
Discurso de Incentivo ao Ódio | Centro de Transparência
transparency.meta.comsteve mookie kong
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Paco Hope #resist
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •oh come ON. Facebook is nearly TWENTY years old. We have so much ample evidence of their intents and trustworthiness. EFF are usually more savvy than this.
POSIWID: Purpose of a system is what it does. Don’t put scare quotes around “mistakes”. Say flat out why we think this explanation is absurd. They are long past any benefit of any doubt. They now should receive the full weight of doubt. They earned our skepticism year after year, cynical reversal after cynical reversal.
brianpierini
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Fully operational gator system
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •respectfully, I think that you (the person in charge of this account) perhaps don't quite realize what this actually means, and why we're not happy about it. This isn't a play at making these platforms more transparent or democratized, this is to allow hate speech that financially benefits the platform to spread unimpeded. They now have carte blanch to allow their algorithms to further agitate and misinform their user base into capital H harmful beliefs that can cause physical, material harm to others.
In short, I think calling this a bad take is an understatement. Perhaps... Read the room. You probably would have picked up the general vibe on this subject was extremely negative by the kinds of people who are often aligned with EFF values.
James Cridland
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •ineiti
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •The article is in fact not as bad as most people point out. The worst part is the last paragraph, which is also used as intro in this toot. It goes against the rest of the article where the EFF points out censorship against minorities, which should effectively not be done.
Unfortunately, having listened to Mark's ramblings in his 6-minute video, what Meta calls "Free Speech" is mostly "Free Hate". Combining with algorithms which push for more engagement, and the human brain which lusts after controversies and hate, this is just a recipe for disaster.
Anyway, time to write that last message on WhatsApp and ditch my final link with Meta...
Paul J Wege
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •@pluralistic whats going on there? maybe the next essay could be about braineating worms? 😡🤯🤢
s427
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Kevin Russell
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Fucking years of support for EFF gone forever.
@EFF BLOCKED
Alexandra Lanes likes this.
Handler Skyler
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •clango
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Jonbjohns
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •ttamttam
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •olea
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •"The EFF's proposed fact checking alternative isn't even that good. Let's suppose someone makes a post debunking an American myth like sex trafficking statistics. A small group of people might decide to "correct" that."
Olives (@olives@qoto.org)
Qoto MastodonNeodog with Glasses Plushie
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Ω 🌍 Gus Posey
in reply to Electronic Frontier Foundation • • •Becky
in reply to Ω 🌍 Gus Posey • • •