Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Dec 9, 2020 8:54:26 GMT -8
Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are becoming the censorship bureau of the D.C. UniParty, which is antithetical to all that America stands for.
This is some seriously scary sh_t.
Where are the free speech advocates on the Left? Where are the civil libertarians?
|
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Dec 9, 2020 18:24:11 GMT -8
If the revolution is coming, those organizations most likely will be some of the first targets.
|
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Jan 8, 2021 15:39:20 GMT -8
This sets a very scary precedent in America
|
|
thefrog
Eminence Grise
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by thefrog on Jan 8, 2021 16:55:02 GMT -8
Here's the common misconception about The Constitution, First Amendment, and Free Speech.
The Constitution only protects you and I from the Government... These are private platforms, not government entities.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Jan 8, 2021 19:14:58 GMT -8
Here's the common misconception about The Constitution, First Amendment, and Free Speech. The Constitution only protects you and I from the Government... These are private platforms, not government entities. We have to have our own platforms. That's the only answer. It's actually what we did by giving TOB the finger. Now we can say whatever we think, without being warned or banned by biased, idiotic mods. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jan 8, 2021 20:47:56 GMT -8
Here's the common misconception about The Constitution, First Amendment, and Free Speech. The Constitution only protects you and I from the Government... These are private platforms, not government entities. I've been saying this for a long time, but it bears repeating. You don't have free speech anywhere on the internet, not even here. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jan 8, 2021 20:54:59 GMT -8
We have to have our own platforms. That's the only answer. It's actually what we did by giving TOB the finger. Now we can say whatever we think, without being warned or banned by biased, idiotic mods. No, now you have your own mod(s) with their own biases that you prefer. |
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Jan 8, 2021 23:45:07 GMT -8
I just joined Parler. It was a pain in the ass getting it done, (I assume because they are being swamped by conservatives leaving twitter and Facebook).
I had heard that Parler was an alternative for Facebook, but it's more like Twitter, instead, which is great because I wasn't on Facebook anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jan 9, 2021 3:44:33 GMT -8
Excellent, but you won't find free speech there either. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Jan 9, 2021 4:46:21 GMT -8
Here's the common misconception about The Constitution, First Amendment, and Free Speech. The Constitution only protects you and I from the Government... These are private platforms, not government entities. You are not seeing the entire issue here Frog. These social media sites are "private" however they have been given rights by government that "private" companies nor citizens enjoy, mainly Section 230 which gives them exclusion from one important thing, LIABILITY. In exchange for that they must remain neutral non editing or curating PLATFORMS. This election they have abandoned that rule. Twitter nor Facebook no longer act as true platforms. |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Jan 9, 2021 7:28:05 GMT -8
It's interesting that so many people believe it's OK for some of the largest, wealthiest companies in the world to say no to people who post in ways they don't like, but that small bakers can't say no to a gay wedding cake.
|
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Jan 9, 2021 7:57:34 GMT -8
I decided to read some of the "RULES" set by such sites as Twitter. They actually are not rules just cleaver (actually not) jargon that only applies when anyone (Rulers of such sites, Co.'s or Orgs) decides their merit holds true. Read here how twitter pleads their case for banning Trump. It is simply the weakest case I have ever read. It is based on assumptions with gaps of gray areas so vast one is blinded by its depth and distance. Permanent suspension of @realdonaldtrump
Overview
On January 8, 2021, President Donald J. Trump tweeted:
“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”
Shortly thereafter, the President tweeted:“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”Due to the ongoing tensions in the United States, and an uptick in the global conversation in regards to the people who violently stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks. After assessing the language in these Tweets against our Glorification of Violence policy, we have determined that these Tweets are in violation of the Glorification of Violence Policy and the user @realdonaldtrump should be immediately permanently suspended from the service.
Can anyone in their objective right mind tie violence to either tweet? Does anyone see that it is Twitter whom states here that we MUST read it as they claim or say. If this doesn't pack some gun powder in your muskets boys then you pansies should find the nearest gender neutral bathroom to hide......  |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jan 9, 2021 8:12:06 GMT -8
Here's the common misconception about The Constitution, First Amendment, and Free Speech. The Constitution only protects you and I from the Government... These are private platforms, not government entities. You are not seeing the entire issue here Frog. These social media sites are "private" however they have been given rights by government that "private" companies nor citizens enjoy, mainly Section 230 which gives them exclusion from one important thing, LIABILITY. You're the one arguing a point you don't even understand. If you get rid of Section 230 and expose these companies to the same liability as any other company these companies will do exactly what you're complaining about. They will moderate their content much more severely than they do now. You can force these companies to bend to your will...just use the normal methods you would use for dealing with a private company who has policies with which you disagree. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jan 9, 2021 8:18:22 GMT -8
I decided to read some of the "RULES" set by such sites as Twitter. They actually are not rules just cleaver (actually not) jargon that only applies when anyone (Rulers of such sites, Co.'s or Orgs) decides their merit holds true. Yes, that's the way it works when you own a private web company. You get to set the terms of use and decide when they are violated. You get to ban people for being stupid and ugly if you want or you can ban them for no reason whatsoever, it's your choice. Just like on this site Bick gets to decide what goes into the Swamp. It's called capitalism and you can post all the angry red-faced emojis that you want but it just makes you look foolish. If you don't like what Twitter and Facebook have done, take your business elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jan 9, 2021 8:19:29 GMT -8
It's interesting that so many people believe it's OK for some of the largest, wealthiest companies in the world to say no to people who post in ways they don't like, but that small bakers can't say no to a gay wedding cake. What's less interesting is your belief that the size of the company involved somehow matters. |
|
