Board Thread:Internal management/@comment-30588401-20161031102701/@comment-7091122-20161102013859

Allow me to give you an analogy as to why doing this won't do us any good.

Say ISIS was recruiting Americans to their terrorist group via something like Twitter, and we voted to remove Twitter from US control in attempt to stray ISIS away from Americans so they can't recruit.

Now, we have to go through the process of moving all of Twitter to a different country. We lose literally all of our say in Twitter by doing this. And that's easier said than done; this will be a lot of effort.

But, the thing is, despite this, this won't do a thing. Americans will still use Twitter, and ISIS would still be able to recruit Americans via it. Why? Because it's still up, duh.

So now what? We can't just stop ISIS from doing this now. We forfeited our ability to. God forbid we give it to another country, and they refuse to both give us it back, and stop ISIS themselves. Then we'll have to take care of that scenario before we can even so much as think about stopping ISIS recruits via Twitter.

If you want to prevent something from causing negative effects, forfeiting any say in it and getting rid of all your power you have on it is incredibly counter-intuitive.