If Free-Speech falls, we're in trouble

[FatherSioux]

I continue to be amazed at the ability of people to blindly allow people to be silenced and lose their voice under the name of protecting people from "bad/dangerous" ideas. Especially from the generation who grew up in the early internet days when you could find videos and pictures of truly horrific shit and terrible ideas.

It started with Alex Jones and everyone laughed and said yeah well he's crazy so he deserves it. Now look where we are, slippery slope is not a logically fallacy, it's very real and we're living it. The sitting president was silenced and removed from the public square.

When will people realize that Free-Speech is there to protect people from the tyranny of those in power. If we allow the pillar of Free-Speech to fall we are all, including the rest of the globe in for some dark times. Put your feelings aside and embrace the bad ideas.

Do you think the Founding Fathers put the First Amendment first just because or do you think it was because it's the pillar of this whole god-damned thing?


PS: This is not the same as the bakery refusing to bake a cake. There are plenty of bakeries. There are not plenty of Facebooks and Twitters.

[budz2112]

Tell me what law congress has made that has limited your free speech. Yeah thats what I thought, back to thinking you have rights on a private social media companies sight.

[peterpal]

The president can still go on national television and give a press conference. This like getting mad at a private newspaper that isn't printing your rants anymore because you violated their terms of services multiple times. He already did get a better treatment than normal users

[Cassawary]

There are not plenty of Facebooks and Twitters.

How many are there

[Nexii]

Facebook and Twitter are not the government.

[Toxigen]

Whats the difference between a lentil and chickpea?

I've never had a lentil on my face.

[magnetaress]

We're hosed.

But I agree, private platforms and user submitted content should be free from government influences. Should heavily moderate their own platforms. And be liable to civil suites in the case of egregious lies and slander, like the insane lies and claims of Trump. Should not have to respect your rights to say whatever you feel at the moment, and shouldn't encourage knee-jerk heated commentary.

If you want to say crazy shit. Print your own leaflets, host your own webserverver, buy your own megaphone and publish your own blog. And if that blog calls for murder and insurrection. Well, you aught be held accountable for inciting violence.

Don't force others to host your drivel. YouTube isn't beholden to StormFront. Or Alex Jones.

[Cassawary]

Facebook and Twitter are not the government.

i'm gonna sue loramin for reverting my wiki vandalisms

[Gustoo]

Shut down big social media

profit

[magnetaress]

Penal.

[FatherSioux]

Facebook and Twitter are not the government.

You're right, they're more powerful.

[magnetaress]

I don't have a Twitter or Facebook account.

Not my problem.

Do not use my negative tax dollars for Twitter shenanigans. It's against my firmly held religions.

[FatherSioux]

The willful ignorance people display on this topic is astounding. Pretending that we live in the 1930's and people can just start a newspaper.

Web Hosting Services have the power to remove you and your opinions from the internet with zero recourse outside of the free-market.

People did try and start their own Twitter and were ostensibly removed from the internet. So now the choice is to create your own web hosting services that will compete with the big boys. Except these huge tech companies just pay 1500% markup on any and all competitors to squash the free-market.

[magnetaress]

The willful ignorance people display on this topic is astounding. Pretending that we live in the 1930's and people can just start a newspaper.

Web Hosting Services have the power to remove you and your opinions from the internet with zero recourse outside of the free-market.

People did try and start their own Twitter and were ostensibly removed from the internet. So now the choice is to create your own web hosting services that will compete with the big boys. Except these huge tech companies just pay 1500% markup on any and all competitors to squash the free-market.

Considering my many bans from this very website and how important it is to enable people to say bad things and misuse their speech.

No one. No institution. No religion. Should ever be forced to accept and publish another person's beliefs or speech.

Merit is an important part of getting published and having your opinions, feelings, and beliefs respected. If your speech has no merit, you don't have a right to force anyone, or anything else to repeat it.

You essentially want to enable the government to force Twitter to say things and protect those base screamers that would vandalize Twitter with their calls for violence towards their political opponents.

Thats a big nono in free society and not about free speech.

It costs like $14 a month to host a blog from your home not even on Amazons virtual machines.

No one is stomping on your rights to make mien kampf public.

I could host it from my cellphone in plain txt and even give u a link. Like right now. My speech freedom is fine.

[Gwaihir]

I continue to be amazed at the ability of people to blindly allow people to be silenced and lose their voice under the name of protecting people from "bad/dangerous" ideas. Especially from the generation who grew up in the early internet days when you could find videos and pictures of truly horrific shit and terrible ideas.

It started with Alex Jones and everyone laughed and said yeah well he's crazy so he deserves it. Now look where we are, slippery slope is not a logically fallacy, it's very real and we're living it. The sitting president was silenced and removed from the public square.

When will people realize that Free-Speech is there to protect people from the tyranny of those in power. If we allow the pillar of Free-Speech to fall we are all, including the rest of the globe in for some dark times. Put your feelings aside and embrace the bad ideas.

Do you think the Founding Fathers put the First Amendment first just because or do you think it was because it's the pillar of this whole god-damned thing?


PS: This is not the same as the bakery refusing to bake a cake. There are plenty of bakeries. There are not plenty of Facebooks and Twitters.

I think we should let free speech, and the entirety of the bill of rights fall.

Today's idiot deserves to be ruled, utterly. Sucks that I'm going to have to be there with the rest of you, but the world needs a new dark age at this point; they've forgotten why the rules were put there in the first place.

[bubur]

you guys act like it's over: https://nypost.com/2021/01/19/joe-exotics-team-has-limo-ready-for-presidential-pardon/

we can still expose carole baskin, do not lose hope in the real issues here

dat limo tho

[budz2112]

Its just hilarious watching conservatives show they know NOTHING about the US constitution, and the very power structure THEY have voted in for the last 4 decades. Stay stupid idiots, your such little tools

[Gustoo]

As nice as it feels to be vengeful, you underestimate the greatness of the privileges we enjoy and the happiness available to us today, even with all of the current pitfalls.

To advocate for throwing the entire thing in the dumpster in exchange for a despot of some kind indicates a level of ignorance or misunderstanding about the current civilization we live in. Our biggest problem is ourselves and always will be. Right now you can enjoy peace and prosperity in any number of ways. If you chose to work hard for 20 years straight, you could retire to the woods somewhere happily for the rest of your life.

If you choose a despot it doesn't matter how hard you work, you get nothing. Its a lot worse.

Choose life and live snake.

[Gwaihir]

The first ones to be exterminated every time a despot comes into power are the threats to their monopoly on power.

The second ones, are the nonproductive. As long as you're able to disingenuously repeat the mantra you can avoid being caught up in the first purge.

The productive remain fairly safe, because purging them leaves you nothing to rule over.

[magnetaress]

Free speech is in absolutely no danger of falling. It's never been healthier. Or more abundant. Or cheep to publish. In all of human history. Everywhere. Even places like China have more free speech via google docs WordPress and medium circumventing their firewall than they can handle.

We are in particularly good shape here with Twitter and Twitters ceo having their rights well protected.

Now get writing your novelas, kindles were displaying plain txt last time I checked via USB from my PC just fine.

[Gustoo]

Crack open a history book. Best time to be alive is now. The only reason to be afraid is because the economic mistakes being made at the top could jeopardize the whole system.

Luckily as long as not too many people sign up for a dictator to rule them (lol wtf) there is no viable system to replace this one and we are likely to keep trucking till the earth is non viable for human life which is going to be in a really long time even with worst case scenarios.

Lets do what we can for better. Bristlebane bless.

[regandna]

Free speech is in absolutely no danger of falling. It's never been healthier. Or more abundant. Or cheep to publish.

Agreed. It seems like they are just grasping on whatever argument they can grab ahold of as they fall. Private actors should not be forced to allow private parties to utilize their platform to (a) spread lies, or (b) provoke violence. Moreso the last one. If Donald Trump had not been tweeting out lies that provoked psychos from bumb fuck boon docks wherever to come out of the woods and rush the White House, he would not have been banned from several social media platforms and suspended from the others. In addition, if he was still the president they would have let his ass carry on as they had been because they did not want to disrupt the commander and chiefs communication tool to the modern-day "marketplace." But Donald is no longer the president and therefore is not afforded those extra privileges.

[DMN]

Free speech is in absolutely no danger of falling. It's never been healthier. Or more abundant. Or cheep to publish. In all of human history. Everywhere. Even places like China have more free speech via google docs WordPress and medium circumventing their firewall than they can handle.

We are in particularly good shape here with Twitter and Twitters ceo having their rights well protected.

Now get writing your novelas, kindles were displaying plain txt last time I checked via USB from my PC just fine.

Volume of speech is not the same as freedom of speech, though given your posting habits it's easy to see why that would be lost on you.

[nostalgiaquest]

The president can still go on national television and give a press conference. This like getting mad at a private newspaper that isn't printing your rants anymore because you violated their terms of services multiple times. He already did get a better treatment than normal users

[magnetaress]

Volume of speech is not the same as freedom of speech, though given your posting habits it's easy to see why that would be lost on you.

Whatabout my posting habits?

[FatherSioux]

If you don't understand why Twitter is not analogous to a local newspaper then I don't know how to have this conversation.

Another question, do you believe that things posted on Parler had never been posted on Twitter?

Lastly, if Parler is held to task on what is posted there, why isn't Twitter? They shouldn't be btw.

[magnetaress]

If you don't understand why Twitter is not analogous to a local newspaper then I don't know how to have this conversation.

Another question, do you believe that things posted on Parler had never been posted on Twitter?

Lastly, if Parler is held to task on what is posted there, why isn't Twitter? They shouldn't be btw.

Wrong.

Parler can host its own servers still.

I'll let the legal experts take it from here.

Carry on.

[Cassawary]

Lastly, if Parler is held to task on what is posted there, why isn't Twitter? They shouldn't be btw.

Govt didn't hold either

Hth

[Jibartik]

If I wanted to make a social media company that only allowed dick picks to be posted on it, and 100 billion users started using it, and you were upset that you couldn't post butt picks, so you asked the goverment to take over my business, you'd be a communist.

[bubur]

If I wanted to make a social media company that only allowed dick picks to be posted on it, and 100 billion users started using it, and you were upset that you couldn't post butt picks, so you asked the goverment to take over my business, you'd be a communist.

dont neglect the 'slippery slope' in between the two ;) namean bb?

you know, the gooch. some people do call it the boober as i understand. no relation

[booter]

https://i.imgur.com/zNDoUbX.png

[Caroll]

So many right-wing snowflakes that want their safe space.

[booter]

muh freeze peach

[Jimjam]

Forcing people to propagate views they don't want to propagate is a crime against free speech.

Ergo, companies can not be forced to publicize views against their will.

The real people infringing on free speech is those trying to force privately owned platforms to air views the share holders don't want to be shared.

[Gravydoo II]

Every company should be FORCED at gun point to publish every single view point I have! Even if they are really mean or tell other people to kill people I dont like! Even if my words result in an insurrection/insurgency, you will carry them. So say'eth the constitution because it was written when twitter was around and could easily reach 28 million people in an instant!

[bubur]

*also we will keep your data forever and give it to law enforcement when asked

knock knock mofugga heard u like mudkips

[magnetaress]

https://i.imgur.com/BCHTp1R.jpg

[loramin]

i'm gonna sue loramin for reverting my wiki vandalisms

:eek:

And as for FatherSioux, as much as I loved Booter's infographic (:D), the real answer to your concern came from Gustoo:

Crack open a history book. Best time to be alive is now.

If you crack open A People's History of the United States, you'll see that free speech has been under assault in far, far worse ways throughout American history. We're talking about powerful rich men buying every newspaper in town and silencing all dissent against them. NOTHING at all like one "newspaper" deciding not to print Trump's opinion.

Once you understand where we came from, you'll understand that (as Gustoo said), we truly have more free speech now than ever.

[magnetaress]

Will p99 wiki ever come back up again?

[Bonethunder]

Twitter and facebook are private companies that have the rigth to censor stuff you say

the big question is

who will the free speech social media giant be?

[magnetaress]

Twitter and facebook are private companies that have the rigth to censor stuff you say

the big question is

who will the free speech social media giant be?

I got all my bomb making information from Barnes and Noble.

[Jimjam]

I got all my bomb making information from Barnes and Noble.

They sell some nice Warhammers too!

[magnetaress]

They sell some nice Warhammers too!

Yeah, I made a funny, bath bombs are cool though ;p

[Jimjam]

Yeah, I made a funny, bath bombs are cool though ;p

is that like explosive soap?

[magnetaress]

is that like explosive soap?

It gets all bubbly and smells really nice.

[Jimjam]

It gets all bubbly and smells really nice.

That sounds lovely. As a basic British bloke, previous to this explanation I had assumed a 'bath bomb' was what happened after having too many baked beans for dinner prior to the night's wash.

I am glad to stand corrected.

[DMN]

If you crack open A People's History of the United States, you'll see that free speech has been under assault in far, far worse ways throughout American history. We're talking about powerful rich men buying every newspaper in town and silencing all dissent against them. NOTHING at all like one "newspaper" deciding not to print Trump's opinion.

Not a terribly good example. Fundamentally little different from the coordinated attacks on Parlor by the usual suspects.


Once you understand where we came from, you'll understand that (as Gustoo said), we truly have more free speech now than ever.

Could you list all the notable people in history who were forever unemployable simply for having the "wrong" opinion on a subject? All the people booted out of school/profession/job due to some joke they made when they were kid? Where fully westernized democratic countries seek to jail/fine people for using the wrong words or simply telling the wrong jokes? Where those same governments compel speech? Where many of the universities in those countries had speech codes?

More idiots on the internet is no metric of free speech.

[Gustoo]

No one is forever unemployable because of having a wrong opinion. Take that same opinion to Texas or California depending on what the opinion was, and you can get the job right away. Wait a year and no one gives a shit. The excitement and intensity of the reactions are bolstered by things like social media that has no interest in anything but its own success (profits) and people being really upset keeps them on facebook reading upsetting posts.

We do need the freedom to roam like some Scandinavian countries have though. People aren't really legally allowed to do much other than buy or sell things or pay rent which makes me a little uncomfortable. We probably won't do that because it would mean that native Americans would be free to roam and that would be too scary.

[getsome]

Could you list all the notable people in history who were forever unemployable simply for having the "wrong" opinion on a subject?.

The following ten individuals were cited for contempt of Congress and blacklisted

Alvah Bessie, screenwriter
Herbert Biberman, screenwriter and director
Lester Cole, screenwriter
Edward Dmytryk, director
Ring Lardner Jr., screenwriter
John Howard Lawson, screenwriter
Albert Maltz, screenwriter
Samuel Ornitz, screenwriter
Adrian Scott, producer and screenwriter
Dalton Trumbo, screenwriter

[Gustoo]

They can probably get solid jobs in North Korea.

[magnetaress]

They can probably get solid jobs in North Korea.

Edward Dmytryk, director, came back from his exile in England. Ratted out his commie buddies before congress, went on to direct many more films and died a ripe old age in Los Angeles.

[Gustoo]

Good for him

[magnetaress]

I was curious. Investigated. Reported back and shared my findings. Incase anyone else was.. Not trying to be a smart ass. I thought your North Korea comment was smart.

All this happened in the 40s. And isn't current events.

It was interesting though.

[Gustoo]

My comment sounded dismissive and sarcastic "OHHH GOOOD FOR YOUUUU!!!"

But really good for him, having another life after exile, dying old. I wonder if he thought free speech was on its way out too?

All this shit does a good job of keeping people from enjoying the awesome world they have around them.

[Swish]

Honestly I don't know why Parler doesn't just find some hosting in a country that doesn't care who says what.

The irony for some would be there, but there's so many legal workarounds these days.

[budz2112]

They found something like that swish, they found a russian host, but its not because they support free speech, its because they support the stuff on parlers sight. All so obvious at this point.

[Jibartik]

Hey if we're going to have the goverment moderate media, lets outlaw fox news while were at it lol

I cant believe libertarians are trying to use federal goverment to control a free market yet here we are lol

[Gravydoo II]

cause they know they are gonna plan terrorist attacks..

[cs616]

Free speech and the first amendment are not the same thing. The first amendment limits the US government's ability to curtail free speech, but the concept of free speech dates back at least 2500 years to the Greeks, and possibly earlier. Conflating the two is lazy, disingenuous, and at least recently, usually due to political partisanship.

As for companies censoring individuals on their platforms, I'm personally opposed to it, but there is nothing illegal about it. That said, I don't think companies should be allow to have it both ways. If they're a free and open platform where they do not control the content, then I think they should remain not liable for that content. However, if they choose to exercise editorial authority, they should be liable for the content on their platform. I think their smartest move would be for them to voluntarily to adhere to first amendment principles as it would be the most simple way to remain neutral both legally and socially, but ultimately that is their decision.

I do think this is going to be bad for these companies in the long run. Remaining neutral and simply providing a service alienates the fewest amount of potential customers, and even if it only alienates a minority, that still opens up the opportunity for competition or innovation to eat into their market share by catering to that minority.

Ultimately, I really don't care about the social media platforms since they're a dime a dozen and there should/will be better things that come along. Despite never using Parler, I think Amazon and Apple kicking them off their platforms sets a far more dangerous precedent than twitter or facebook censoring a few people since the internet practically runs on AWS and would be much harder to replace. Hopefully these developments will lead to the innovation of new, more robust methods of communication that don't have gate keepers though.

And before anyone assumes anything about my politics, I think Trump and Biden are both garbage, and the Capitol protestors/riots/insurrectionist were a bunch of morons. Our entire political system caters to wealthy special interests and almost all politicians are corporate sycophants. I'm not on your team, or their team, or any team. The whole system is corrupt and only gives the illusion that your opinion matters.

[Jibartik]

In America, the bill of rights only protects you from the goverment infringing on your right to say whatever you want.

So having private entities or companies be forced to publish stuff they dont want to, by the government, is the only idea on the table that is infringing on free speech.

[Elrood]

I continue to be amazed at the ability of people to blindly allow people to be silenced and lose their voice under the name of protecting people from "bad/dangerous" ideas.

I continue to be amazed at the ability of people who most loudly claim to be concerned about their first amendment rights seemingly have *no clue* what the first amendment says or does.

It takes like 15 seconds to read it, and unlike other certain amendments, it is crystal clear in it's intent and purpose.

[Cassawary]

Free speech and the first amendment are not the same thing. The first amendment limits the US government's ability to curtail free speech, but the concept of free speech dates back at least 2500 years to the Greeks, and possibly earlier. Conflating the two is lazy, disingenuous, and at least recently, usually due to political partisanship.

As for companies censoring individuals on their platforms, I'm personally opposed to it, but there is nothing illegal about it. That said, I don't think companies should be allow to have it both ways. If they're a free and open platform where they do not control the content, then I think they should remain not liable for that content. However, if they choose to exercise editorial authority, they should be liable for the content on their platform. I think their smartest move would be for them to voluntarily to adhere to first amendment principles as it would be the most simple way to remain neutral both legally and socially, but ultimately that is their decision.

I do think this is going to be bad for these companies in the long run. Remaining neutral and simply providing a service alienates the fewest amount of potential customers, and even if it only alienates a minority, that still opens up the opportunity for competition or innovation to eat into their market share by catering to that minority.

Ultimately, I really don't care about the social media platforms since they're a dime a dozen and there should/will be better things that come along. Despite never using Parler, I think Amazon and Apple kicking them off their platforms sets a far more dangerous precedent than twitter or facebook censoring a few people since the internet practically runs on AWS and would be much harder to replace. Hopefully these developments will lead to the innovation of new, more robust methods of communication that don't have gate keepers though.

And before anyone assumes anything about my politics, I think Trump and Biden are both garbage, and the Capitol protestors/riots/insurrectionist were a bunch of morons. Our entire political system caters to wealthy special interests and almost all politicians are corporate sycophants. I'm not on your team, or their team, or any team. The whole system is corrupt and only gives the illusion that your opinion matters.

what's a special interest?

[cs616]

In America, the bill of rights only protects you from the goverment infringing on your right to say whatever you want.

So having private entities or companies be forced to publish stuff they dont want to, by the government, is the only idea on the table that is infringing on free speech.

Again, free speech as a concept is bigger than and distinct from the bill of rights. Yes, the bill of rights only limits the government's ability to censor speech, but censorship is censorship no matter the source. What the companies are doing is certainly not illegal, but anyone who supports the free and open exchange of ideas should be opposed to it morally.

[cd288]

Jesus OP how incredibly whiney can you be? Move on

[loramin]

Not a terribly good example. Fundamentally little different from the coordinated attacks on Parlor by the usual suspects.



Could you list all the notable people in history who were forever unemployable simply for having the "wrong" opinion on a subject? All the people booted out of school/profession/job due to some joke they made when they were kid? Where fully westernized democratic countries seek to jail/fine people for using the wrong words or simply telling the wrong jokes? Where those same governments compel speech? Where many of the universities in those countries had speech codes?

More idiots on the internet is no metric of free speech.

Freedom of speech is not (and has never been) freedom from consequences of that speech. The only consequences our constitution prohibits are the government retribution kind, but what private citizens do to you as a result of your speech is, and has always been, their freedom to choose.

[FatherSioux]

Jesus OP how incredibly whiney can you be? Move on

Yeah look at me, defending peoples right to free expression. Fuck me right? You clowns must not realize the cannons of silence can and will be turned on you.

I grew up with the internet and I’m amazed at how soft we’ve become where we think the best way to handle people with crazy opinions is to silence them and force them into an even more extreme echo chamber. As opposed to laughing at them and explaining to them why their ideas are bad.

The Left loves to pretend to be the party of intellects yet they cant see or deny what these types of policies breed. Not smart.

[Jimjam]

Yeah look at me, defending peoples right to free expression. Fuck me right? You clowns must not realize the cannons of silence can and will be turned on you.

I grew up with the internet and I’m amazed at how soft we’ve become where we think the best way to handle people with crazy opinions is to silence them and force them into an even more extreme echo chamber. As opposed to laughing at them and explaining to them why their ideas are bad.

The Left loves to pretend to be the party of intellects yet they cant see or deny what these types of policies breed. Not smart.

If I PMed you a bunch of disagreeable stuff to post on my behalf and you refused, you’d be ‘repressing my freedom of speech’ by not broadcasting my message in your posts.

I’m not entitled to the benefit of your platform, and the government shouldn’t force you to platform my views as it is a greater assault on your freedom of speech.

[Danth]

History repeats Sioux. Back in the 50's blacklisting communists was in vogue. Shoe's on the other foot this time around but the tactics stay the same. We'll see whether the ship of state rights itself this time.

The Left loves to pretend to be the party of intellects yet they cant see or deny what these types of policies breed. Not smart.

This is because of a very seductive notion that naturally worms its way into the mind of the educated: The notion is that we're no longer animals and we're no longer subject to instinctual tendencies. "We're better than that, it can't happen here." It can and if left unchecked, it will. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Danth

[Cassawary]

If I PMed you a bunch of disagreeable stuff to post on my behalf and you refused, you’d be ‘repressing my freedom of speech’ by not broadcasting my message in your posts.

I’m not entitled to the benefit of your platform, and the government shouldn’t force you to platform my views as it is a greater assault on your freedom of speech.

turns out the Constitution is ill-equipped to handle computers or anything beyond Anarcho-Agrarianism, really

:p

[Cassawary]

I'm not soft. Lol.

The really big irony is that the left and right are both severely pissing off the middle. It's those middle of the road extremists and radicals you really got to worry about. Ya'know. When they just want a little peace and moderation :p

Can you imagine if the the-th, you know the thing, wasn't written by psychotic barley farmers?

[DMN]

Freedom of speech is not (and has never been) freedom from consequences of that speech. The only consequences our constitution prohibits are the government retribution kind, but what private citizens do to you as a result of your speech is, and has always been, their freedom to choose.

How does this comport with your earlier claim then?


free speech has been under assault in far, far worse ways throughout American history. We're talking about powerful rich men buying every newspaper in town and silencing all dissent against them. NOTHING at all like one "newspaper" deciding not to print Trump's opinion.




Looks a bit more like you are trying to make a weak semantic argument after realizing how badly you lost on the merits.

[Gwaihir]

what's a special interest?

A dog with a bad leg

[Jibartik]

Again, free speech as a concept is bigger than and distinct from the bill of rights. Yes, the bill of rights only limits the government's ability to censor speech, but censorship is censorship no matter the source. What the companies are doing is certainly not illegal, but anyone who supports the free and open exchange of ideas should be opposed to it morally.

Advertisers have the right to pull their support from a TV station or show if they dont like the content of that show, or magazine, in a free market.

What you are literally pitching is, if you advertise on a platform, that you cannot STOP advertising on that platform, if you dont like what that platform is doing, because you're interfering with their right to free speech.

Its not even close to something the government is supposed to protect.

It's fine to say that you think they shouldn't ban people, or that this forum shouldn't ban people, that's your right. But if this forum decides to kick you for saying that its their right, and if you go crying to the feds to make them stop, you're a commie!

[Jibartik]

What libertarians are pitching with social media companies right now, is quite literally what the stupid ass goverment was doing in the plot to Atlas Shrugged.

Its amazing that we're so backwards as a society right now, the commies are on Ayn Rand's side and the libertarians are on Marxis's.

[HalflingSpergand]

Im mad




Oh wait no im not mad

[cs616]

What you are literally pitching is, if you advertise on a platform, that you cannot STOP advertising on that platform, if you dont like what that platform is doing, because you're interfering with their right to free speech.

Its not even close to something the government is supposed to protect.

It's fine to say that you think they shouldn't ban people, or that this forum shouldn't ban people, that's your right. But if this forum decides to kick you for saying that its their right, and if you go crying to the feds to make them stop, you're a commie!

The only thing I pitched was the notion that platforms who assume editorial authority over their content should no longer be able to claim exemption from liability for the content on their platform, as they do today. Either they're a platform for user generated content that conforms to first amendment principles or they're a publisher providing user generated content and assume the responsibilities associated with that.

I was however advocating that companies should voluntarily choose to adhere to first amendment principles because it would be more simple than trying to moderate all the content on their platform, and would alienate the fewest potential customers, but I never implied I wanted the government to force them into providing a platform for content they disagreed with. You're arguing against points I never made.

[Jibartik]

The only thing I pitched was the notion that platforms who assume editorial authority over their content should no longer be able to claim exemption from liability for the content on their platform, as they do today. Either they're a platform for user generated content that conforms to first amendment principles or they're a publisher providing user generated content and assume the responsibilities associated with that.

I was however advocating that companies should voluntarily choose to adhere to first amendment principles because it would be more simple than trying to moderate all the content on their platform, and would alienate the fewest potential customers, but I never implied I wanted the government to force them into providing a platform for content they disagreed with. You're arguing against points I never made.

What happens when twitter loses advertisers over bad press based of things their users are doing? Twitter and shareholders should just eat that loss because the goverment prevents them from controlling own product and investments?

[cs616]

Also, while I'm not advocating for this, I do think there is an argument for forcing companies to adhere to the first amendment principles. At this point many of these platforms have become akin to public utilities like phone lines when it comes to communication. Phone companies are not allowed to monitor your calls and refuse you service based on the content of your speech as far as I'm aware. Companies like twitter, amazon, facebook, etc rely on publicly funded infrastructure like phone and fiber lines to conduct their business, so it could be argued the public has a vested interest in how these platforms are governed.

Again, I don't think that is necessarily the answer, but I seem to remember hero of the left Elizabeth Warren proudly declaring that businesses weren't built in a vacuum, and I don't see why these tech companies would be any different.

[Jibartik]

Lol

So i make an investment into twitter.

Twitter starts collapsing, because they are not allowed to ban the 900,000,000,000 unbannable bots that are now on the site going directly to the top of my news feed because trending algorithms are unfair to speech.

I cant sell my stock, because that would be pulling my support of the free speech of those bot creators, as well.

So I just have to ride my investment to the ground.

I feel like my dad here. This is like the conversation my dad had with me when i was 14 and discovered the wonders of communism.

I seem to remember hero of the left Elizabeth Warren proudly declaring that businesses weren't built in a vacuum, and I don't see why these tech companies would be any different.

So you're saying you prefer Elizabeth Warren? Because most people on the left think you're an alt right facilitator or a batshit crazy commie, if you voted for warren.

Next you're going to tell me that the people that get payed to work at the pencil factory, risked exactly the same amount as the guy who built the factory.

[FatherSioux]

If you want to make the argument that Twitter is the same as any old business go right ahead. For me that argument cannot be made in good faith, these tech companies control the narrative and control what people believe and they have a bias that is apparent. They wield massive influence on the country.

My argument is that these companies do not operate in the same way traditional news sources do. We need to adjust and adapt to the times.

[magnetaress]

People can still protest and wave signs, write books, make movies, write and sing songs like they've always done since Vietnam.

Even less likely to encounter lethal force for peaceful assembly like they encountered at Kenn State. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

Like especially if they remain peaceful. Like protests should.

Also maybe don't rely on Twitter or Facebook for news.

Try www.axios.com. they're 37337.

[Fame]

lol fucking wrecked by free market capitalism, very appropriate for your 1/32 Sioux blood quantum

1492

[budz2112]

And WHY do twitter and facebook wield massive power, OH RIGHT because of tool voters like Father. Remember that thing called Citizens United. yeah your united in your stupidity and ignorance for decades. Stay a tool, fool

[DMN]

lol fucking wrecked by free market capitalism, very appropriate for your 1/32 Sioux blood quantum

1492

Free market capitalism? Hmm, doesn't exist where companies aren't able to freely compete as some are given special protections/privileges from the state(s). And if was capitalism at its root, twitter never would have done a thing. This bit of fiscal idiocy will cost them billions if not trillions long term. A capitalist would want to make money, not lose it.

[budz2112]

^ this boy voted for the people that put supreme court justices on the court that said Corporations could freely influence our elections. Capitalism also doesnt mean to BLINDLY profit as much as possible, without any regard to any consequences or responsibilities to your society. Thats your definition and you still cant see HOW YOU brought this power to these corporations. Stupid, is something you will never break from.

[Cassawary]

Jibartik dunking hard tonight

[magnetaress]

War, violence, political purges, insurrection, sedition, death threats.

Just not good when a 3rd of your userbase is swearing they'll kill another 3rd while the middle 3rd is left scratching their heads tired of this shit.

Guess which 3rd is losing popularity in the free market place of ideas?

[imperiouskitten]

War, violence, political purges, insurrection, sedition, death threats.

Just not good when a 3rd of your userbase is swearing they'll kill another 3rd while the middle 3rd is left scratching their heads tired of this shit.

Guess which 3rd is losing popularity in the free market place of ideas?

there is no worry or hurry, for u my dear will always find cause to reach for the lash

intrinsically fash

[imperiouskitten]

If you want to make the argument that Twitter is the same as any old business go right ahead. For me that argument cannot be made in good faith, these tech companies control the narrative and control what people believe and they have a bias that is apparent. They wield massive influence on the country.

My argument is that these companies do not operate in the same way traditional news sources do. We need to adjust and adapt to the times.

shit for brains here is awakening to technoconservatism

goood

nationalise twitter (and many other industries), provide UBI, it is the only way to preserve the parts of our social fabric that we actually like. The world has changed.

Maybe soon you'll be happy that there are queers assimilating into heterosexual identities thanks to medical science, too.

turns out the Constitution is ill-equipped to handle computers or anything beyond Anarcho-Agrarianism, really

:p

[Cassawary]

And WHY do twitter and facebook wield massive power, OH RIGHT because of tool voters like Father. Remember that thing called Citizens United. yeah your united in your stupidity and ignorance for decades. Stay a tool, fool

Citizens United was a natural consequence of Buckley vs Valeo

I dislike this meme

[FatherSioux]

My anger stems from this us vs them mentality that is rampant. It should be US vs Them except the US is everyone here and the Them is those in power. They do not speak on our behalf and they do not have our interest at heart. This is true for the Left and the Right and we're ALL responsible for the current state of affairs. Life has been too easy and we've been asleep at the wheel. Maybe the Boomers are to blame?

[Cassawary]

My anger stems from this us vs them mentality that is rampant. It should be US vs Them except the US is everyone here and the Them is those in power. They do not speak on our behalf and they do not have our interest at heart. This is true for the Left and the Right and we're ALL responsible for the current state of affairs. Life has been too easy and we've been asleep at the wheel. Maybe the Boomers are to blame?

Take a midol and ignore the frog he sucks

[Jibartik]

You know whats amazing, both sides pretty much are sick of the us vs them mentality, but we just keep thinking that we have https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_Dxc2Ejh4s

[cd288]

Yeah look at me, defending peoples right to free expression. Fuck me right? You clowns must not realize the cannons of silence can and will be turned on you.

I grew up with the internet and I’m amazed at how soft we’ve become where we think the best way to handle people with crazy opinions is to silence them and force them into an even more extreme echo chamber. As opposed to laughing at them and explaining to them why their ideas are bad.

The Left loves to pretend to be the party of intellects yet they cant see or deny what these types of policies breed. Not smart.

Yeah except as other commenters have stated you actually how no idea how the right to free speech actually works and in what ways it’s limited.

Leave the intelligent conversation to the informed people bub.

[Mead]

There are not plenty of Facebooks and Twitters.

I get hard every time I see someone on my facebook make their farewell post due to this grave injustice. All of you conservatives crying about being censored need to find a way to create your own social media outlet in order to circle jerk to racism, hate speech, the spreading of disinformation, and whatever other ignorant information you want to get out there. Until then you will be censored and banned for flying too close to the sun. Sorry not sorry.

[Jibartik]

Are the people that dont use Instagram, uninformed?

[imperiouskitten]

My anger stems from this us vs them mentality that is rampant. It should be US vs Them except the US is everyone here and the Them is those in power. They do not speak on our behalf and they do not have our interest at heart. This is true for the Left and the Right and we're ALL responsible for the current state of affairs. Life has been too easy and we've been asleep at the wheel. Maybe the Boomers are to blame?

considering you landed here treating me badly for no reason other than population cohort, this post is 100% full of shit. Back to advocating for political purges with you, genius. You have no interest in peace. Your brain is in constant conflict and flaccid, angry words fall out both sides of your mouth.

[FatherSioux]

Your attention seeking is offputting and I can't stand it. Perhaps it reminds me of a younger me(who I don't like).

Hey Mead glad I lured you out to take a shot at me.

My post is 100% genuine, am I angry at people? Yes. Do I hate anyone here? No.

What I am most angry with is the way we get wrapped up in these low-level IQ flexing contests where someone pretends to be more of an expert at some arcane craft than the other elf lord. No one every admits faults or exposes their fragility.

[Gwaihir]

Ahem. I believe I did that already. I still get barbed by "egalitarians" attempting to lord superiority over me from time to time for it.

[feniin]

I get hard every time I see someone on my facebook make their farewell post due to this grave injustice. All of you conservatives crying about being censored need to find a way to create your own social media outlet in order to circle jerk to racism, hate speech, the spreading of disinformation, and whatever other ignorant information you want to get out there. Until then you will be censored and banned for flying too close to the sun. Sorry not sorry.

This, 100%.

[Kaveh]

Social media has been disastrous for democracy. I’m not sure how we ban it and retain our “values”, however. We’d probably be OK if people were educated in civics and understood how exceptional rare it is in human history for people to have many rights as they do in our society. That’s just my $0.02 anyway

[Kaveh]

I get hard every time I see someone on my facebook make their farewell post due to this grave injustice. All of you conservatives crying about being censored need to find a way to create your own social media outlet in order to circle jerk to racism, hate speech, the spreading of disinformation, and whatever other ignorant information you want to get out there. Until then you will be censored and banned for flying too close to the sun. Sorry not sorry.

Man this is very easy to say, but in practice, BLM and other social movements like it are very much about bull dhit as well. I kept hearing how it “black people had taken the Capitol, they would’ve been lit up!” That’s amazingly misguided. Cops do not open fire on black people. Ethiopia has had more blacks killed by law enforcement since last June than America has had since 1964

I just made that up, but y’all are all dumb enough to believe it!!!! Point made

[Jibartik]

Idk, blaming social media for our problems sounds like just yet another excuse in a long line of excuses for our dumbassery.

[Arvan]

Getting blocked because you violated the TOS of a private company doesn't mean your first amendment rights are being taken away jesus christ you guyz

[magnetaress]

I wonder how social media works in Singapore.

[Pootytangx]

If only people could stfu arguing about this stupid ass shit and go research the Khazars.

Wake up for real you wage slave retarded ass motherfuckers

[Pootytangx]

Yes I know this will be censored too

[regandna]

Joe Biden did his thing today!

[Jibartik]

he wore a mask so we couldn't read his lips as he swore to satan.

prove me wrong!

[magnetaress]

was it star spangled? I don't tv, don't like tuning into that conscious wavelength

ya'll check out the podsast i lanke din the big politics thrad it's freeee speech at it's finust

[Ennewi]

I continue to be amazed at the ability of people to blindly allow people to be silenced and lose their voice under the name of protecting people from "bad/dangerous" ideas. Especially from the generation who grew up in the early internet days when you could find videos and pictures of truly horrific shit and terrible ideas.

It started with Alex Jones and everyone laughed and said yeah well he's crazy so he deserves it. Now look where we are, slippery slope is not a logically fallacy, it's very real and we're living it. The sitting president was silenced and removed from the public square.

When will people realize that Free-Speech is there to protect people from the tyranny of those in power. If we allow the pillar of Free-Speech to fall we are all, including the rest of the globe in for some dark times. Put your feelings aside and embrace the bad ideas.

Do you think the Founding Fathers put the First Amendment first just because or do you think it was because it's the pillar of this whole god-damned thing?


PS: This is not the same as the bakery refusing to bake a cake. There are plenty of bakeries. There are not plenty of Facebooks and Twitters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater

Free speech exists everywhere in tandem with language; the consequences may vary but the meaning is still communicated and open to interpretation. "Once it's out there, it's out there forever."

Tipper Gore was responsible for the Parental Advisory label, though ultimate credit should be given to Prince. That was largely seen as an infringement on free speech, yet it proved to be ineffective. Musicians don't make their livings off of record sales anyway, especially nowadays, but instead through touring and merchandise.

If a public figure is disallowed from performing at a public venue or speaking on a platform, than the onus is on that person to find new methods of spreading their message, otherwise the contents of that message should be considered irrelevant to them by every listener/reader. However, if that venue or platform is so large and has been monopolized, there is precedence for the umbrella company being broken into smaller companies, which has been done in America (Bell System 1982/4, which some have attributed to delays in widespread high speed internet availability) and is likely to happen again in the not-too-distant future with Zuckerberg's Facebook, Instagram, etc.

[magnetaress]

I like my speech to be refined and aged well and be flavored with some thought, logistics, foresight, divinity, over instinctual feeling and masculine energy.

Otherwise I'm not generally inclined to listen or pay that much attention.

[Jibartik]

Because they use Facebook is not why people dont like trump lol

I said it in 2016 and Ill say it in 2020, facebook didnt have any affect on the election.

Every election the losers are trying to blame facebook.

What the hell lol its fricken family photo album.

Are these people like, walking around having their hearts and mind won or swayed every other day, because they read a facebook post?

I have never given any critical thinking to anything anyone has ever said on facebook and if someone is, the problem isnt facebook, it's that the education system failed them long ago and if you're worried about the nation, start there.

[Mblake81]

Social media has been disastrous for democracy. I’m not sure how we ban it and retain our “values”, however. We’d probably be OK if people were educated in civics and understood how exceptional rare it is in human history for people to have many rights as they do in our society. That’s just my $0.02 anyway

What alienates me is that for 39 years, born and raised here, I have never heard people from any walk of life go on about democracy like this. We talk about Freedom, whatever that entails.

Democracy used this way sounds like an outsider looking in who has missed a key point. I have enabled you to be a more natural American, I could not bear this annoyance any longer.

"This fourth of July come on down to petes snack shack, celebrate your independence with our freedom pack"

"This fourth of July come on down to Abu Bin Abablalal eatery and celebrate our democracy!"

Have I ever celebrated democracy?

[Jibartik]

Man, this video game forum is like, a quilting circle now. We're all "this new technology is the devil!" and "people dont love god anymore!"

lol

[Ennewi]

Man, this video game forum is like, a quilting circle now. We're all "this new technology is the devil!" and "people dont love god anymore!"

lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilts_of_the_Underground_Railroad

[bomaroast]

It's much easier to tow the line than to think for yourself.

[Mblake81]

Patriam, today when I get home from work I will pour myself a small glass, raise it "Here is to our democracy"

I will kick it back. Then I would like to hum some songs about Democracy, I am sure there are some catchy ones but they slip my mind at the moment. Seeing as you are a fellow American and love our culture as much as the next guy, could you recommend some songs? thanks bud.

[FatherSioux]

I wish I could sew/quilt.

[Jibartik]

If it wasnt for our damn youth, we'd know now! but the devil was in our music. :(

[magnetaress]

i never stopped being baptised by st peter's holy spirit of the mormons

i don't hate technology

i hate letting myself be ruled by technology

i feel like i've discovered a way through this keyhole tho

[Jibartik]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/dems-new-bill-aims-to-bar-qanon-followers-from-security-clearances

OK now this one sounds like the government is restricting peoples freedom of speech.

[magnetaress]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/dems-new-bill-aims-to-bar-qanon-followers-from-security-clearances

OK now this one sounds like the government is restricting peoples freedom of speech.

There shouldn't need to be a bill for this. It should be a normal part of the vetting process. I went through the process and Qanon conspi*racists (haha) wouldn't likely make the cut.

I believe this is because a lot of people got waivers from the executive branch after getting denied clearance. So it's a legislative check against like Kushner getting daddy or that Greene chick.

Tbqh I think it's to narrow and specific a legislation and pretty dumb. More of a gesture or symbolic thing. They want to point to Republicans who vote against it and call them qanons. It's legislation designed to fail and make a ruckus. It's idiotic legislation imo.

I wasn't allowed to make any kind of political posts when I served in 01. I had to remain apolitical and only say specific things to reporters.

As far as senators go, they can say and believe whatever they want, but they don't have the right to get a clearance if they are idiots. Who shouldn't have one.

There's usually more restrictions that come with actually being granted the clearance and sometimes an NDA, like if its deets on weapon tech like an apache choppers electronics.

Also clearance is compartmentalized and managed, you don't get clearance to see everything. And you don't get to walk around with hardcopies. Or tell people without clearance what u learn.

[Jibartik]

You can make an argument for why you think you and I should be banned from government but that same exact argument can apply to antifa occupy Wall Street Bernie Sanders AOC or the Squad support.

Just because I read a website just because I comment on project 1999 doesn’t mean that I am a terrorist and I shouldn’t be involved in normal activities.

If the normal vetting process would’ve solve this problem in the first place then why do they need to introduce this bill?

Seems to me like they’ve added being affiliated with or being open minded or interacting with certain political groups, now disqualifies you from having the rights afforded to you by the bill of rights.

I doubt this bill is going to pass because to me I sounds like it’s crazy.

[magnetaress]

You can make an argument for why you think you and I should be banned from government but that same exact argument can apply to antifa occupy Wall Street Bernie Sanders AOC or the Squad support.

Just because I read a website just because I comment on project 1999 doesn’t mean that I am a terrorist and I shouldn’t be involved in normal activities.

If the normal vetting process would’ve solve this problem in the first place then why do they need to introduce this bill?

Seems to me like they’ve added being affiliated with or being open minded or interacting with certain political groups, now disqualifies you from having the rights afforded to you by the bill of rights.

I doubt this bill is going to pass because to me I sounds like it’s crazy.

They don't. They are crazy. It's idiotic. Reread my post.

I agree.

But its not banning ppl from government. A lot of people serve in government without clearances. Mayors, county commissioners. Sherrifs. (Maybe confidential but)...

I believe we are over reliant on the clearance system and there's other things we should be doing, were screwing otherwise good combat medics cuz of confidential stuffs, but this is a different topic, tangent.

Qanons shouldn't be granted clearances tho. Also a difference between reading and staying abreast of and intelligence gathering, and outright espousing qanon.

If it passes ill be mind blown and depressed. Momentarily, its a checkbox against those for it.

[FatherSioux]

*Here we gooo*
(in Mario voice)

[magnetaress]

I agree with the OP failure of acthcuall free speech wud be real bad.

[cd288]

You can make an argument for why you think you and I should be banned from government but that same exact argument can apply to antifa occupy Wall Street Bernie Sanders AOC or the Squad support.

Just because I read a website just because I comment on project 1999 doesn’t mean that I am a terrorist and I shouldn’t be involved in normal activities.

If the normal vetting process would’ve solve this problem in the first place then why do they need to introduce this bill?

Seems to me like they’ve added being affiliated with or being open minded or interacting with certain political groups, now disqualifies you from having the rights afforded to you by the bill of rights.

I doubt this bill is going to pass because to me I sounds like it’s crazy.

This has nothing to do with restricting free speech. It has to do with high level security clearances. People are vetted for those under a variety of requirements and some of the significant requirements include assessments and analysis of the persons mental state, stability, etc.

Believing that Donald Trump is a messiah sent to wage a secret war against pedophiles in the highest levels of the government isn’t something anyone who is rational or stable would believe. Those people should not have security clearances.

The bill isn’t saying you can’t affiliate with QAnon or preach QAnon’s beliefs. Just that you can’t have a security clearance at a high level of the government. People get rejected for security clearances for things that are much less significant by comparison, but I’ve never seen you complain about that.

[FatherSioux]

Believing that Donald Trump is a messiah sent to wage a secret war against pedophiles in the highest levels of the government isn’t something anyone who is rational or stable would believe. Those people should not have security clearances.

How long is ol donny boys lease good for in your psyche? Has to be minimum 4 years, perhaps a lifetime deal he struck with you is my guess.

[cd288]

How long is ol donny boys lease good for in your psyche? Has to be minimum 4 years, perhaps a lifetime deal he struck with you is my guess.

Yes because explaining what QAnon believes equates to that? Interesting logic.

[FatherSioux]

Yes because explaining what QAnon believes equates to that? Interesting logic.

Rest easy kind soul, his power to hurt you has been removed.

[magnetaress]

Pehze is the K'u este of them all.

[Domo]

Twitter & Co. a private companys. You can join them if you like but if you join you agree to their houserules. If you're not able to follow them you will be kicked out. Simple as that.


Few years ago I had a small chat with workers of a Funeral company.
And Ive asked them some general questions about their work like whats the worst/best about your work etc.
And they told me that the worst is if a child is involved etc.
So I asked them how they handle such situations etc. and they told me that they sometimes joke about the death.
Once they had a construction worker who got smashed by a container and they said some BS like "now hes flat like a pancake".
And the one guy told me that they sometimes need such dirty jokes to reset their brain to not fall in a to deep negative hole.
But he also told me that whenever they make such jokes about the dead people they take care of, they never tell them in public. They say them only among them to handle the hard situation better.

What I am trying to say with my bad broken english is that the timing is very important for your 100% free-speech.

I personaly can laugh about all kind of jokes. Pedophile jokes, racist jokes. Nazi jokes etc.
But it depends where I am and with who.

There is something called manners many people seems to forgot about.

[Jibartik]

gjwofYhUJEM

[Caroll]

Repeal the 1st and 2nd amendment to save America.

[Kaveh]

Repeal the 1st and 2nd amendment to save America.

I’d suggest the 13th and 19th instead

[Zipity]

I’d suggest the 13th and 19th instead

Your seriously suggesting repealing the amendment that abolished slavery? And then women’s right to vote? You have to be fucking trolling.

[Cassawary]

Your seriously suggesting repealing the amendment that abolished slavery? And then women’s right to vote? You have to be fucking trolling.

It's the response amendment repealing talk deserves.

[imperiouskitten]

"R u guys still talking about Trump 3 days after he left office? Sounds like the troll meme that is my political philosophy sure has u mad ha ha ha. Rent free" -Albert Einstein

[Byue]

oh is it illegal to voice your opinion of the government now?

because this is absolutely the only thing free speech protect.
and the same idea that enable business owner to not bake cake for gay wedding -for example- that made twitter legally able to kick trump off their platform.

basically, you are really free to say whatever you want, or almost whatever you want but you are never free from social backlash which I believe is what you find problematic.

conservatives are a funny bunch.
why don't you worry about the undue power of capital over democracy or the gerrymandering of politicians or real politics instead of perceived slight against your political side which, to be fair, is on the wrong side of history.

[Toxigen]

accelerationism in spades these days

[Domo]

The (hardcore) right-wing voter dont care about facts. They are Anti's.
If the Left-wing says the weather is nice the (hardcore) right-winger will say fakenews the weather sucks.

I bet that if all the partys around the world would say the Pandemic is only a flu and we shouldn't be worried about, the (hardcore) right-winger would be 100% for masks and lockdowns.

[cd288]

The (hardcore) right-wing voter dont care about facts. They are Anti's.
If the Left-wing says the weather is nice the (hardcore) right-winger will say fakenews the weather sucks.

I bet that if all the partys around the world would say the Pandemic is only a flu and we shouldn't be worried about, the (hardcore) right-winger would be 100% for masks and lockdowns.

This is accurate

[Cassawary]

oh is it illegal to voice your opinion of the government now?

because this is absolutely the only thing free speech protect.
and the same idea that enable business owner to not bake cake for gay wedding -for example- that made twitter legally able to kick trump off their platform.

basically, you are really free to say whatever you want, or almost whatever you want but you are never free from social backlash which I believe is what you find problematic.

conservatives are a funny bunch.
why don't you worry about the undue power of capital over democracy or the gerrymandering of politicians or real politics instead of perceived slight against your political side which, to be fair, is on the wrong side of history.

that was not the ruling, they punted on animus, it had nothing to do with section 230.

I hope in time you'll realize what an idiot you've been.

[Vizax_Xaziv]

Remember when right-wingers spent a year arguing that a bakery doesn't have to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple?

Conservative hypocrisy knows no bounds!

[Vizax_Xaziv]

You're allowed to say whatever you want in America. Youre not guaranteed a lack of repercussions, however.

Go into any local business and start raving like a lunatic and they'll kick your ass out as well.

[Cassawary]

Remember when right-wingers spent a year arguing that a bakery doesn't have to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple?

Conservative hypocrisy knows no bounds!

Well should the state of Colorado be allowed to display religious hostility in enforcing the law?

[Toxigen]

https://youtu.be/Bt2S9xehQ-I

lmao

[Jibartik]

I posted in the other thread on accident but this weekend I watched Bill Mar talk about how we should be listening in on Americans the way we do noncitizens, just like the Snowden movie.

And the former FBI guy that he had on the show was saying that we need to expand our domestic terror laws to function the way international terror laws work, meaning if you’re a suspect they can do anything they want to you.

lol, as a (non-self described) apocalyptic alt righter, I almost hope they do try that crap! lol

[cd288]

I posted in the other thread on accident but this weekend I watched Bill Mar talk about how we should be listening in on Americans the way we do noncitizens, just like the Snowden movie.

And the former FBI guy that he had on the show was saying that we need to expand our domestic terror laws to function the way international terror laws work, meaning if you’re a suspect they can do anything they want to you.

lol, as a (non-self described) apocalyptic alt righter, I almost hope they do try that crap! lol

I mean we already are listening in on everyone. Everything you say and type is probably logged on a top secret server ready to be accessed by relevant agencies should there ever be a need.

[Mblake81]

oh is it illegal to voice your opinion of the government now?

because this is absolutely the only thing free speech protect.
and the same idea that enable business owner to not bake cake for gay wedding -for example- that made twitter legally able to kick trump off their platform.

basically, you are really free to say whatever you want, or almost whatever you want but you are never free from social backlash which I believe is what you find problematic.

conservatives are a funny bunch.
why don't you worry about the undue power of capital over democracy or the gerrymandering of politicians or real politics instead of perceived slight against your political side which, to be fair, is on the wrong side of history.

Crown Royal, no thanks.

[Jibartik]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/24/us/politics/jackson-reffitt-father-capitol-riot.html

Reminds me of when the hitler youth were told to report their non compliant parents. :o

[loramin]

I posted in the other thread on accident but this weekend I watched Bill Mar talk about how we should be listening in on Americans the way we do noncitizens, just like the Snowden movie.

And the former FBI guy that he had on the show was saying that we need to expand our domestic terror laws to function the way international terror laws work, meaning if you’re a suspect they can do anything they want to you.

lol, as a (non-self described) apocalyptic alt righter, I almost hope they do try that crap! lol

Bill Maher is a piece of shit fascist pretending to be a left-winger. Acting like he in any way represents the left is almost like pretending the folks who believe in lizard people conspiracies represent the right.

[Cassawary]

Bill Maher is a piece of shit fascist pretending to be a left-winger. Acting like he in any way represents the left is almost like pretending the folks who believe in lizard people conspiracies represent the right.

He's not a fascist. He's an asshole-Democrat.

That's a thing too. :D

[Cassawary]

To that point, there once was the notion of social fascists to describe moderate libs in the late Weimar era.

"The Left"'s refusal to treat with them allowed Hitler to take power.

[Cassawary]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/24/us/politics/jackson-reffitt-father-capitol-riot.html

Reminds me of when the hitler youth were told to report their non compliant parents. :o

That kid will probably hafta eat a bullet before he turns 20 :(

Ripperinos

[FatherSioux]

Remember when right-wingers spent a year arguing that a bakery doesn't have to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple?

Conservative hypocrisy knows no bounds!

Remember when there are tons of other bakeries to go to?

Remember how there are countless Twitter(essentially public space)?

Remember when righties tried to start their own Twitter but then were shut down?

If you don’t see the issues here you’re a partisan hack.

[imperiouskitten]

didnt see u fegs complaining when they wrecked & dehosted 8chan

this precedent is long set, lamestreamers

[imperiouskitten]

first htey came for the memers, and i did not speak up for i did not realize that politically, i am a memer. so i got on board with the rest of the boomers when Fox News awakend to the issue

[imperiouskitten]

Remember when there are tons of other bakeries to go to?

Remember how there are countless Twitter(essentially public space)?

Remember when righties tried to start their own Twitter but then were shut down?

If you don’t see the issues here you’re a partisan hack.

I find any speech you advocate for highly suspect, considering you've used your speech here to endorse a political purge of the US population. Maybe U should reroll if you want anyone who's not a frothing cannibal to take ya serious.

[Cassawary]

didnt see u fegs complaining when they wrecked & dehosted 8chan

this precedent is long set, lamestreamers

we should codify titter as the public square from this time til the end of time am i rite??

[imperiouskitten]

we should codify titter as the public square from this time til the end of time am i rite??

wahtever is convenient to u at the time meiner bredren

[FatherSioux]

I find any speech you advocate for highly suspect, considering you've used your speech here to endorse a political purge of the US population. Maybe U should reroll if you want anyone who's not a frothing cannibal to take ya serious.

I try and be as genuine as I can here. If I did “reroll” it would just be me with a less genuine version of myself, a move backwards. Not to mention you hyenas would probably oust me anyways because I’m not playing a bit here.

You mischaracterize my statement continuously. My comment was about a cleansing of the divisiveness in the country. An event to bring us together, sadly that usually requires tragedy.

The point conservatives want heard is that censoring is an extremely sensitive lever, we don’t like to mess with that sort of thing regardless of who/what ideas are being quelled. When Alex Jones was deplatformed I was vocal about it and most people laughed but I stand by that as being the start of this madness. I hope we can pull back from the brink. Which I think we will because at the end of the day I think good ideas prevail, censoring is not a good idea.

[imperiouskitten]

I try and be as genuine as I can here. If I did “reroll” it would just be me with a less genuine version of myself, a move backwards. Not to mention you hyenas would probably oust me anyways because I’m not playing a bit here.

You mischaracterize my statement continuously. My comment was about a cleansing of the divisiveness in the country. An event to bring us together, sadly that usually requires tragedy.

The point conservatives want heard is that censoring is an extremely sensitive lever, we don’t like to mess with that sort of thing regardless of who/what ideas are being quelled. When Alex Jones was deplatformed I was vocal about it and most people laughed but I stand by that as being the start of this madness. I hope we can pull back from the brink. Which I think we will because at the end of the day I think good ideas prevail, censoring is not a good idea.

wahtever is convenient to u at the time meiner bredren

[booter]

https://i.imgur.com/06Ts9SZ.jpg

[Evia]

I try and be as genuine as I can here. If I did “reroll” it would just be me with a less genuine version of myself, a move backwards. Not to mention you hyenas would probably oust me anyways because I’m not playing a bit here.

You mischaracterize my statement continuously. My comment was about a cleansing of the divisiveness in the country. An event to bring us together, sadly that usually requires tragedy.

The point conservatives want heard is that censoring is an extremely sensitive lever, we don’t like to mess with that sort of thing regardless of who/what ideas are being quelled. When Alex Jones was deplatformed I was vocal about it and most people laughed but I stand by that as being the start of this madness. I hope we can pull back from the brink. Which I think we will because at the end of the day I think good ideas prevail, censoring is not a good idea.

Good form. I don't gaf if we disagree about something, but thank God we CAN disagree. This new movement of forcing your views down another's throat needs to stopppp nowwww.

[magnetaress]

https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/27/22253251/discord-bans-the-r-wallstreetbets-server

Wsb discord banned, yalls thots?

[cd288]

I try and be as genuine as I can here. If I did “reroll” it would just be me with a less genuine version of myself, a move backwards. Not to mention you hyenas would probably oust me anyways because I’m not playing a bit here.

You mischaracterize my statement continuously. My comment was about a cleansing of the divisiveness in the country. An event to bring us together, sadly that usually requires tragedy.

The point conservatives want heard is that censoring is an extremely sensitive lever, we don’t like to mess with that sort of thing regardless of who/what ideas are being quelled. When Alex Jones was deplatformed I was vocal about it and most people laughed but I stand by that as being the start of this madness. I hope we can pull back from the brink. Which I think we will because at the end of the day I think good ideas prevail, censoring is not a good idea.

I’m a conservative and I’m totally fine with them censoring some of these whack jobs. Not all conservatives are whiney snow flakes like yourself. You complain so much you should be a democrat

[FatherSioux]

You’re not conservative if you’re okay with with people being censored for wrong-think.

[Jibartik]

Imagine if you made dumb webpage for bored narcissists so they can share random nothings, and then the goverment declares your stupid idea a utility.

Even the fricken NEWS paper or cable NEWS isnt a utility lmao

[budz2112]

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

Isaac Asimov (Jan 21, 1980)

[GinnasP99]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFt74mAX4Ig

[Wrekt]

fuck all of you fascists. reading your literal whining about not being able to be a racist terrorist on a private company's platform has been juicy. keep it up.

hope you were in dc on the 6th. fbi coming. lol stupid fascist fucks.

[GinnasP99]

Seek Christ immediately

[Jibartik]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFt74mAX4Ig

2nd best movie ever made, just behind dawn of the dead :)

[HalflingSpergand]

Fbi coming , haha that made me actually laugh

[Jibartik]

Its so rad how the patriots are like "in order to save freedom, we have to take it from the market."

[Seducio]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YuUBI1XwG0

"The first amendment is first for a reason. The second amendment is just in case the first one doesn't work out."

-Dave Chappelle

[cd288]

You’re not conservative if you’re okay with with people being censored for wrong-think.

I’m ok with people being censored for attempting to install a dictator because they believe in an Internet conspiracy theory.

[Danth]

Its so rad how the patriots are like "in order to save freedom, we have to take it from the market."

Ma Bell and Edison were eventually required to provide service to everyone whether they liked their customers' politics or not. The local newspaper was NOT required to print editorials it disliked. There's a difference between carriers and publishers. Twitter blocking users for political reasons is distasteful but probably similar to newspapers. I definitely care a whole lot more when an ISP or a web hosting service drops someone it dislikes. Those types of services really ought to be regulated as utilities (ISPs are, to a degree). This is, I think, a case where legislation hasn't caught up with technology. Living history is never as easy as reading it, and it took decades for lawmakers to catch up with the traditional utilities as well.

Danth

[Jibartik]

Ma Bell and Edison were eventually required to provide service to everyone whether they liked their customers' politics or not. The local newspaper was NOT required to print editorials it disliked. There's a difference between carriers and publishers. Twitter blocking users for political reasons is distasteful but probably similar to newspapers. I definitely care a whole lot more when an ISP or a web hosting service drops someone it dislikes. Those types of services really ought to be regulated as utilities (ISPs are, to a degree). This is, I think, a case where legislation hasn't caught up with technology. Living history is never as easy as reading it, and it took decades for lawmakers to catch up with the traditional utilities as well.

Danth

Those services were regulated to a degree but then the patriots got rid of it lol

You cant make this shit up.

[Danth]

Those services were regulated to a degree but then the patriots got rid of it lol

You cant make this shit up.

Totally agree on that point, it's absurd and all we can do is smack our foreheads and laugh.

[Jibartik]

I cant wait for part 2 to come out.

Or maybe that was part 2 and the next one is our last one. lol

[FatherSioux]

Totally agree on that point, it's absurd and all we can do is smack our foreheads and laugh.

It’s really disingenuous to claim one side of the aisle loves everything it’s sides politicians do. Conservatives and Liberals strongly dislike most things that politicians do, this is the problem. When people then pretend that the opposing side loves everything it’s representatives do. We get a world where conservatives are all nazis and all lefties are commies. Carry on

[Danth]

Of course Sioux. My comment was implicitly directed towards those folks who supported such actions, not necessarily at everyone from one party or the other. I trust a reader to recognize such distinctions so we don't all have to write half a dozen disclaimers any time we want to say anything.

Danth

[Domo]

https://i.imgur.com/EGYYOH1.jpg

[Toxigen]

I <3 my firearms and they can take them from my cold, dead hands.

[Domo]

I am pretty sure nobody wants to take your guns. Its a carrot on a stick so the GOP can control you like a sheep

[Toxigen]

I am pretty sure nobody wants to take your guns. Its a carrot on a stick so the GOP can control you like a sheep

baaaaaaa motherfucker, baaaaaaaa


oh btw biden already started a buyback program - wanna take a guess as to what comes after that?

[Jibartik]

It’s really disingenuous to claim one side of the aisle loves everything it’s sides politicians do.

yea true, like patriots and libertarians used to like a free market, but now they are commies that want to regulate the media. :o

[imperiouskitten]

idk Obama was really ramping up the antigun messaging. I honestly don't know why they do it, seems like box office poison to me but they do be outta touch.

[Jibartik]

here is a great top comment from the libertarian subreddit, where you can see how libertarians are just commies now lol

It’s true, though. There are a lot of different things people mean by “libertarian”, and I think the most damaging one is that people should all live and act individually in most everything. Humans became the dominant species because of our ability to work collectively and benefit collectively. We absolutely need to protect individual liberty, but collective work, action, and even benefits are not the bogeyman that the right wants libertarians to think it is.

[imperiouskitten]

i think we should just all be bros, if we just convince everyone to be a bro then we wont need any cops and what not. We also wont need roads and shit, we will just all go on camping trips all the time like all of us and kick it. Thats my political identity and i will never, ever learn any better and i will vote for wahtever is closest to this ideal forever because i am still a good citizen afterall.

[Jimjam]

i think we should just all be bros, if we just convince everyone to be a bro then we wont need any cops and what not. We also wont need roads and shit, we will just all go on camping trips all the time like all of us and kick it. Thats my political identity and i will never, ever learn any better and i will vote for wahtever is closest to this ideal forever because i am still a good citizen afterall.

Where we're going, we won't need roads.

[loramin]

here is a great top comment from the libertarian subreddit, where you can see how libertarians are just commies now lol

Honestly, serious libertarians have always been for some government protections. Their philosophy is "the government that governs least governs best" ... not "the government which doesn't exist governs best" (that would be the Anarchist philosophy).

Ron Paul (probably the most successful Libertarian politician in recent memory) certainly wasn't trying to tear down the federal government; he was just trying to get it out of doing a lot of what it does ... stuff that he didn't think government should be involved in.

But of course, different Libertarians have different ideas about what to keep and what not, and I think your quote reflects that more.

[FatherSioux]

yea true, like patriots and libertarians used to like a free market, but now they are commies that want to regulate the media. :o

It’s more about equal protection when it comes to internet hosting.

[Evia]

Bros don't have titties.

Not true, bro! I've got plenty of bros with tits. To be a bro you don't need to be a male, only a friend of fellow people.... you know, bros!

[Gwaihir]

Wrong.

Parler can host its own servers still.

I'll let the legal experts take it from here.

Carry on.

(((Who))) are the "legal experts"?

[magnetaress]

(((Who))) are the "legal experts"?

Anyone who knows more legalese than I, obviously.

[imperiouskitten]

did blake just validate my gender?! and describe socially visible secondary sex characteristics as the primary markers of gender?!?

thanks bro!

[magnetaress]

We're all bros here.

[Toxigen]

https://i.imgur.com/cpQF3ZZ.jpg

[Evia]

https://i.imgur.com/cpQF3ZZ.jpg

Lol!!! One of the best memes I’ve seen in a bit. Thanks, bro!

[Danth]

...

Whoever made that image deserves a pat on the back for taking the trouble to use the 46 star flag. I appreciate such an attention to detail.

Danth

[magnetaress]

https://i.imgur.com/cpQF3ZZ.jpg

Basically

I want opium tho.

U can haz all my coco.

[Mblake81]

did blake just validate my gender?! and describe socially visible secondary sex characteristics as the primary markers of gender?!?

thanks bro!

Do you really wish to be treated that way, as if you are really a woman? (on this forum)
I will do it on this forum if you wish. But in return I ask that you and others like you to never flirt with me in any way, shape or form.

Note: Is is only fair that I mention, which you probably have guessed, that I am setting you up. Think really hard before you answer.

Deal?

[imperiouskitten]

Do you really wish to be treated that way, as if you are really a woman? (on this forum)
I will do it on this forum if you wish. But in return I ask that you and others like you to never flirt with me in any way, shape or form.

Note: Is is only fair that I mention, which you probably have guessed, that I am setting you up. Think really hard before you answer.

Deal?

I don't see how I could possibly keep a deal to disallow all women to flirt with you, dear

[Mblake81]

Then you do not truly wish such things and you have no determination to be what it is that you claim to be.

Have a nice day, I will never offer that again.

[imperiouskitten]

scratching my head, is he implying only God could do such a thing? or is it just nonsenseposting stacked on nonsenseposting? none may know surely but our intrepid dukeventurer

[Cecily]

You should have taken the deal just to see what he would do. If your offer is open to real women, I accept your proposal, Blake.

[imperiouskitten]

it's a cucknundrum in the 1st place & since his writing is for shit all i have to do is flirt with him to nullify it, AIDS brain obsessed

real woman, arent u an ace dyke anyway? xD :o real normative

u do have the fat thing going, though!

[Cecily]

https://i.imgur.com/ALMUmWw.jpg

[FatherSioux]

Quick question for the Constitutional Scholars here.

If the first amendment only applies to Government censoring, does that mean it's okay for private citizens/companies to deny citizens of due process? Or does that only work one way when your ox isn't being gored?

Or maybe the Constitution doesn't really apply to private citizens/companies at all, they shouldn't have to follow the rules because they're not the Government? Trying to understand this pretzel you must twist yourself in.

GME to the Moon

[magnetaress]

Tbh. I'm annoyed the government gets in the way of my own very special brand of Tyranny.

[loramin]

Quick question for the Constitutional Scholars here.

If the first amendment only applies to Government censoring, does that mean it's okay for private citizens/companies to deny citizens of due process? Or does that only work one way when your ox isn't being gored?

Or maybe the Constitution doesn't really apply to private citizens/companies at all, they shouldn't have to follow the rules because they're not the Government? Trying to understand this pretzel you must twist yourself in.

GME to the Moon

Dude, this isn't like 2nd year of law school stuff ... it's basic high school civics.

[Cassawary]

If the first amendment only applies to Government censoring, does that mean it's okay for private citizens/companies to deny citizens of due process?

due proc·ess
/d(y)o͞o prəˈses/
noun
fair treatment through the normal judicial system

null

[budz2112]

The 1st amendment was created by our founding fathers so that Americans COULD ALWAYS say what they feel about our government and president. We know you trump supporters cant understand that, you wanted the government to censure anyone that spoke badly of your idol.

[HalflingSpergand]

Heh

[Toxigen]

free speech is already dead

[magnetaress]

Free speech is only speech u didn't need money to say in the first place. No one owes u a platform.

Free speech applies directly to the verbal noises outa ur mouth and the government.

Not me. Or my multitrillion dollars of digital propogandas.

[Seducio]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Those are the words in the actual text.


The Constitution/Amendments was and is interpreted differently by different folks and its various interpretations are a feature not a bug. Reason is that the variations of interpretation enabled all original 13 States to get on board with ratification despite vast cultural differences at the time.

Since ratification in 1791, the First Amendment has been reviewed by the Supreme Court in many cases that have clarified and set parameters around what it means. Things like obscenity laws, the trials of comedians such as Lenny Bruce, as well as World War 2 state-side censorship have all played into how First Amendment works in the USA. So it has always been about regulating Government action and on the side of private citizens rather than most of the other powers in the Constitution that get delineated to the Govt.

With regard to political spending, most recently the 2010 Citizens United case enabled the concept that money equals speech and also that Corporations are people. This is highly controversial, but does seem in line with the intent of the Amendment. So essentially the current interpretation of the free speech clause with political spending looks like:


The Court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political communications by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.

[Cassawary]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Those are the words in the actual text.


The Constitution/Amendments was and is interpreted differently by different folks and its various interpretations are a feature not a bug. Reason is that the variations of interpretation enabled all original 13 States to get on board with ratification despite vast cultural differences at the time.

Since ratification in 1791, the First Amendment has been reviewed by the Supreme Court in many cases that have clarified and set parameters around what it means. Things like obscenity laws, the trials of comedians such as Lenny Bruce, as well as World War 2 state-side censorship have all played into how First Amendment works in the USA. So it has always been about regulating Government action and on the side of private citizens rather than most of the other powers in the Constitution that get delineated to the Govt.

With regard to political spending, most recently the 2010 Citizens United case enabled the concept that money equals speech and also that Corporations are people. This is highly controversial, but does seem in line with the intent of the Amendment. So essentially the current interpretation of the free speech clause with political spending looks like:


The Court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political communications by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.

Citizens United was decided in the cradle by Buckley v Valeo

Good post though

[magnetaress]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Those are the words in the actual text.


The Constitution/Amendments was and is interpreted differently by different folks and its various interpretations are a feature not a bug. Reason is that the variations of interpretation enabled all original 13 States to get on board with ratification despite vast cultural differences at the time.

Since ratification in 1791, the First Amendment has been reviewed by the Supreme Court in many cases that have clarified and set parameters around what it means. Things like obscenity laws, the trials of comedians such as Lenny Bruce, as well as World War 2 state-side censorship have all played into how First Amendment works in the USA. So it has always been about regulating Government action and on the side of private citizens rather than most of the other powers in the Constitution that get delineated to the Govt.

With regard to political spending, most recently the 2010 Citizens United case enabled the concept that money equals speech and also that Corporations are people. This is highly controversial, but does seem in line with the intent of the Amendment. So essentially the current interpretation of the free speech clause with political spending looks like:


The Court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political communications by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.

Fuck. Speech is now an expenditure and costs money.

U just blewwwed me up outta da wattah. Direct hit.

[Gravydoo II]

Isnt that messed up?? You're not bribing a guy with 100k "donated" to them. You're just talking to them... If I "donate" 100 bucks to a cop at a traffic stop some how, im asking for something. When they do it, its just because they like that person SOOOOOO much. Its NEVER in exchange for anything, ever. lol cause we dummies.

I also thinks thats such a cute "rub our faces in it" thing with corporations being people. They are people right up until the point you gotta put handcuffs on someone. Then, all the sudden, they are not people and nobody even knew what was happening the entire time they were breaking the law, especially the boss.

Its legalized bribes. Anyone who takes corporate pac money is bought and paid for. The companies literally write the bills they want passed. lol its amazing. We think africa and the 3rd world is corrupt cause they will do it for less than a million. Trump was literally selling pardons.

[Seducio]

The corridors of power have always been Machiavellian.

The internet just gives regular folks a better glimpse into that club.

[Gwaihir]

13996

[Seducio]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKUaqFzZLxU

The Big Club - George Carlin

(worth the 3 min watch)

[Grakken]

Free speech is only speech u didn't need money to say in the first place. No one owes u a platform.

Free speech applies directly to the verbal noises outa ur mouth and the government.

Not me. Or my multitrillion dollars of digital propogandas.

Things got muddy, when federal courts ruled Trump couldn't block people on twitter citing it as a public forum.

If twitter is a public forum than it should be protected by the first amendment.

[magnetaress]

He was in the government at the time tho. So it's not like me blocking Mr potato head. I am not executing the governments interests.

Twitter is a terrible public forum though and presidents should not use it in an official capacity. Just like they shouldn't use p99 forums.

That'd kill our community. Imagine if Biden conducted all his business here.

Nothing stops the government from making an actual dot.gov message board. They won't rly tho. Itd be an unmoderated shithole.

A gov discord channel would be lol wtf.

[Seducio]

For sure seeing Twitter messing with the Presidential Account in various ways should raise alarms. Big Tech is a new and relatively unchecked global power on the international stage.

I mean it may have been the only time European leaders ever stoop up for Trump on anything.

The devil is always in the details about the twitter issue. The courts basically said that if a Govt official uses a twitter account to broadcast official Govt business then their account page is like a public forum regarding being able to block views of their constituents. This is similar to how city council members have to hear members of their community for an allotted time even if their constituents say crazy things. However the Govt doesn't create Twitter rules so Twitter ultimately gets to decide who has an account.

The Govt can make Twitters existence very difficult in response. You will notice though that there is great division on how to handle Big Tech power.

So that power will grow unabated for a while.

[Seducio]

Just like they shouldn't use p99 forums.

That'd kill our community. Imagine if Biden conducted all his business here.

Hilarious. The community would be killed I agree.

We'd probably finally get Green Guild forums though.

[Jibartik]

The Govt can make Twitters existence very difficult in response.

title of thread should be: If gov makes twitters existence very difficult, then we're in trouble.

[Kaveh]

Trump sucks but so does Twitter. You can vote to get trump shit canned, can we do the same to Mark Zuckerbergerstein or Jack Dorsey? Two things can be true at the same time. The 1st amendment doesn’t protect people on Twitter, but Twitter is also a dog shit platform that has resulted, overwhelmingly, in bad shit, like rhe beheading of a teacher in France by Muslims

At minimum, a person should have a 135 IQ to possess any social media. Below 120 should relegate a person to menial labor

[Gwaihir]

Hilarious. The community would be killed I agree.

And cloned

[Jibartik]

Trump may suck, but twitter can do whatever the F they want.

If you dont like twitter, dont fricken use it.

I have used twitter exactly zero times in the last 5 years, do I suffer? am I uninformed?

Gimi a break.

[Seducio]

You misunderstand the power they wield.

[Seducio]

Leaders around the world know how powerful Big Tech is, Twitter included, and that is why they have accounts on Big Tech. We are in uncharted territory with regard to what information the public will ultimately be allowed to see. Traditional power centers are colliding with these Big Tech digital power centers. Disruption is what Silicon Valley does best.

The result is unclear.

[Kaveh]

Trump may suck, but twitter can do whatever the F they want.

If you dont like twitter, dont fricken use it.

I have used twitter exactly zero times in the last 5 years, do I suffer? am I uninformed?

Gimi a break.

A French teacher was beheaded by a dumb ass Chechen because of ire stirred up on Twitter

It matters. And I don’t have Twitter either dummy, but sadly we live in a society with Muslims and other braindeads. It matters

[Kaveh]

Elon musk delenda est

[Seducio]

Would have been been cool if Zuckerberg and Dorsey had just acted more like Tom from Myspace....

Ridden the wave and then cashed out while in the hundreds of millions and gone into photography or something. Tom did it right.

Instead we minted new billionaires because your relatives shared too many cat pics.

Square is rad though. Props to Dorsey on that.

[Jibartik]

A French teacher was beheaded by a dumb ass Chechen because of ire stirred up on Twitter

It matters. And I don’t have Twitter either dummy, but sadly we live in a society with Muslims and other braindeads. It matters

Lmao are you really suggesting that we should get rid of free speech because there are Muslims and Chechens in France there that are impressionable?

[imperiouskitten]

Elon musk delenda est

thank God, a good take from oil man

[Domo]

just read a bit about Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Is she talking so much BS so people keep talking about her, or is she just stupid?

[feniin]

just read a bit about Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Is she talking so much BS so people keep talking about her, or is she just stupid?

She's a moron and all of Trump's fans love that shit.

[FatherSioux]

Pretzels tighten

[FatherSioux]

She's a moron and all of Trump's fans love that shit.

Hasty Generalization for $500 Dr. Oz

[Gravydoo II]

No. There is no debate. She is an idiot. She denies reality. Stupid. Willfully ignorant. Mass shootings are all fake, according to her.

[FatherSioux]

No. There is no debate. She is an idiot. She denies reality. Stupid. Willfully ignorant. Mass shootings are all fake, according to her.

You’ve missed the point. The point is that in fact All Trump supporters do not “love that shit”.

[Domo]

but with her supitd comments people and news channels talking about her.

Isnt there the saying that there is no bad publicity?

[Gravydoo II]

Point is she was elected by republicans, trumpies. Of course not all of them like her. Not all of them are located in her district, either.