406
Kickstarter bans all NSFW content from the website
(www.theverge.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 May 2026
406 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
84816 readers
3507 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They probably think the US prohibition didn’t work because they just didn’t try hard enough
Prohibition worked. It had the annoying unintended consequence is some people ignored it and became criminals, but alcohol consumption clearly dropped when it was in effect.
And yet the illegal alcohol market boomed and it gave massive rise to organized crime and government corruption to allow it. It doesn’t “work” in any practical sense, it just concentrates the problem and makes it even harder to control.
It completely works if you ignore all of the times it didn’t work.
It only didn't work if you demand absolute perfection, which is unreasonable. I'm going to stand by it worked.
I already addressed the unintended consequences.
Just like the “War On Drugs” worked; Drugs won!
yay drugs!
Okay, real question, if prohibition on drugs doesn't matter, why all the hubbub about states legalizing weed years back? "Prohibition doesn't work, anyway," so who cares?
I think the hubbub was because the states were legalizing something illegal at the federal level and that wasn’t a precedent that had been set yet.
The only point of interest is that the states and the federal disagree?
You are correct, technically Prohibition worked, but its one of those "at what cost" scenarios. The absolute explosion in organized crime that came with it along with the associated cost of enforcement for fighting alcohol consumption makes the argument for a different approach.
I won't downvote you because what you said is true, its just that the negative association of the explosion of crime and government overreach into peoples' lives gives people a kneejerk reaction to the statement.
People often don't think of WHY the prohibition movement was so popular that it could get an amendment passed, but alcoholism at that time was so much more severe than we can even fathom today. Their approach was wrong, but they had legitimate grievance.