Though I find this amusing and this plan may work in the shorthand, I see this type of passive aggressiveness being more problematic in the long run. For starters, too much harassment in this manner and the companies will most likely just temporarily remove their call centers and force e-mail, which they could just use a filtering system to auto-trash incoming concerns related to the topic. This would also effectively harm the employees who are just trying to do their jobs as they would be laid off with no call centers being active. Arguably, I know people may say 'well the employees are at fault for choosing to work for the companies', and I would agree. But I still feel like it would be unjust, if the entire company isn't going down, to only punish one section that holds no power.
This type of "harassment' is actually what has made these same payment processors backtrack in the past, when they tried to remove sexual content from Only Fans, and at the advent of VHS tapes when a group of religious people attempted to keep pornographic material on VHS out of stores. These people at the time referenced a 1970s movie Caligula, which was basically the movie equivalent of 'no escape' or whatever the rape game they're using now is, as well as an Atari 2600 game called "Custer's Revenge," which wasn't merely a rape game, but also featured racist abuse of Native Americans.
And briefly, Bank of America (who owned Visa back then, that changed in 2008) listened. Suddenly video stores had to close that section or lose the ability to process cards.
Until the fap army was organized by a comedy magazine - specifically, National Lampoon, which once wasn't just a shitty movie mill, but was instead Ivy League mad magazine.
You know what they said? They said "just write a letter to Visa."
They got half a million letters written to Visa saying "dude I'll stop using your card."
It got so bad that the retail company Sears (a large company at the time) decided it was an opportunity, and they started Discover card. A lot of people forget this now, but Discover card's original reason to exist was "we're not going to tell you how to shop. If it's legal, we'll transact it."
Complaining in all forms helps. We have to scare these companies (like Visa) worse than Collective Shout did. They won't try to save 40,000 customers at the expense of two hundred thousand.
Complaining would work, yes, I am not arguing that fact. I strongly support it. I'm saying that most people attempting to occupy phone lines just to cause clutter and chaos would most likely not do so in a way that isn't obviously harassment and would make things worse as it would just be seen as bullying and endanger the livelihood of those just trying to make a living.
The public outcry and fighting back by refusal to use the cards is the underlining point that you mentioned that is what won in the end, nothing else. Boycotting is always the answer. Always. It is the most professional and strong means of obtaining any goal and this is what I have been suggesting to anyone capable of doing so. My bank uses Visa as both credit and bank cards, and I have a large debt I am paying off through them, or trust me, I'd already be refusing to use my card. But that is the main goal here we need to all do as a community; refuse to provide them with an income if possible. They already are taking a large blow financially by refusing to accept payments related to NSFW content, so it would harm them even more and their numbers would drop financially if as many people as possible refused to transfer services using their 'products' (as they word it on their websites when I went to read their policies).
Also, it was nice to see someone who detailed all the things I grew up with lol I was born in the early 80's, and know quite well all the names you dropped and the events. Also, side not about the Discover card is it ultimately failed for a long while because it's policy was no interest, instead charging the company accepting it the interest fees, making most places refuse it. Did not know it was Sears who had created it though. But, I do recall Sears being the K-Mart and Wal-Mart of the 90's. It was the go-to place for everything from professional photography to buying my NES games and school clothes, so that makes sense.
Edit: I'll add Collective Shout is just a patsy. If you look into it, you'll see they are a group of ten people with little to almost no funding until the recent random millions donated to them out of nowhere. MasterCard and Visa have done this many times in the past without any organization pressuring them to do so. Do I despise Collective Shout? Absolutely. But there is no way, in my eyes anyway, that they are the reason two card companies would risk billions of dollars by shutting out the adult industry as a steady source of revenue all for a handful of people. There is definitely a lot more to it than just a few feminazis playing Karen on the interwebs. I don't believe anyone pressured them to attempt to shut down Manga Library Z when they did, for example.
Boycotting?
You want to boycott "using money on the internet?"
The opponent here is an effective monopoly, they control the majority of payment processing. You cannot boycott without abstaining from the modern world.
This is the same nonsense as trying to boycott ISPs, Cell Providers, or Insurance Companies.
Sure, you technically CAN by abstaining from society, but can you REALLY expect someone to abstain from society.
Visa and Mastercard are not the only credit cards out there, or the only ways of transferring funds. Also, they are not a monopoly. They aren't even a trust. To be a monopoly the entire infrastructure would have to be owned by just one company. To be a trust it would have to be run by multiple companies partnering. But as I said, Visa and Mastercard are only two of many such entities, which makes them neither. Monopolies are illegal here in the states. If they were a monopoly, they wouldn't be allowed to exist. The problem is that they AREN'T a monopoly as it means they aren't under the scrutiny of the government as they should be regardless.
Haha, you sweet summer child. "Monopolies are illegal here in the united states"
I have 3 options for internet service provider in my area. All 3 are owned by comcast.
Not only is that a monopoly, it's a government enforced monopoly because it is illegal for someone to make an ISP without government permission.
Additionally, simply because these 2 companies are owned by different entities does not suddenly make the monopolistic business they do disappear. They clearly collude, when one raises rates, the other does too. When one decides to go on a random censorship crusade, the other one does too.
Laws are only as useful as they are willing to be enforced, and the US government is not interested in enforcing its laws against billionaires, only peasants.
Here's another example, a year ago or so, every single US Cellular provider was caught illegally selling user data, estimated to be billions of dollars in profit. The largest fine that was given out was a percent of that. Imagine being allowed to steal 1 billion dollars, and the "penalty" for stealing 1 billion dollars was paying government officials 0.01% of the money you stole. This is how our government works now. This is how laws are enforced.
"Laws are for thee and not for me" is the motto of corporate america.
Actually, about Comcast, you are mistaken. The reason it appears as a monoply for you is because you are not a large business. If you check your area's sources depe enough, you'll find that you actually could get a different provider if you were a large business. Because it counts as having two opposing companies as an option in the same area, even if one is inaccessable to the average person, it is allowed. It is a stupid BS clause, and I found out about it dealing with exactly what you said when I lived in Florida and was only offered Bright House. Apparently, Verizon existed for corporations in the area, such as Wal-Mart.
And again, you appear to not know what a 'trust' is. The collusion you described would be a perfect description of one such trust. However, as they are only two of many card companies, it is not a monopoly or a trust. If you wish to insult me by talking down to me and calling me a child, at least do your research first and look like you know what you are talking about.