johnwang wrote:If we all use the logic as, "I can't care less about what you do", there won't be any "online discussion" and the RSF should be shut down.
A company demonstrates and promotes a certain style gun on TV against another type of gun showing you can defend yourself with it, but fixes the results. Unaware, many people buy and learn how to use this style gun to defend themselves.
A promoter of another style gun doesn’t believe the company gun works as advertised and wants the public to know. He sends a message to the company, challenging them to demonstrate their style gun will work against him. The company sends a practitioner with the style gun to prove it works. The promoter streams the demonstration on the internet. The company’s style gun fails. The practitioner gets a bloody nose within 10 seconds.
The story goes viral through social media, the internet and TV around the world. The company that teaches how to use the style gun loses face and large potential profits.
The company then says they will arrange another demonstration. However, this time they want to bring a different style gun. The promoter refuses. He says he doesn’t mind the company using and teaching that style gun to defend themselves. However, it’s not the same style gun that was originally advertised.
The highly profitable, politically well-connected company starts a smear campaign (fake news) against the promoter, gets a new law passed that these types of challenges are illegal, shuts down the promoter’s business internet website, sends multiple hitmen to challenge him, and has authorities threaten lengthy jail time.
Then under duress, the promoter is coerced into publicly apologizing (crying profusely) and tells the world he is going to learn how to use the company style gun for self-defense, although silently he knows it doesn’t work as advertised. The public continues to buy and learn how to use the company style gun. The company continues to profit and keep their reputation, due to their quick action.