Twitter

[Seattle Husker]

Actually TWTR is a public company and they have set out certain obligations in the SEC filings. They ARE opening the door for litigation by shareholders as arbitrary action in silencing conservatives without any manner of due process harms the value. Further, this goes to demonstrate that TWTR is acting as a publisher, something that they lack the proper ability to do without running afoul of their 230 protections.

You're the lawyer but none of that has anything to do with the 1st amendment and it's infamous Freedom of Speech. Hasn't Twitter already come out in favor of Section 230 changes?

 

[theiioftx]

I’m speaking in general terms and I believe it is a slippery slope. Universities are preventing conservative speakers and liberals will quickly attack someone who posts something they disagree with. That does not concern you? What if the tables turn?

 

[horninchicago]

Why do liberals hate the first amendment? I know the libs here are intelligent- why are they not fearful of losing their rights?

They're like this guy. No matter how ridiculous it make them look, still have to support the team.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I’m speaking in general terms and I believe it is a slippery slope. Universities are preventing conservative speakers and liberals will quickly attack someone who posts something they disagree with. That does not concern you? What if the tables turn?

I'm generally not in favor of giving large platforms to extremist views. It's dangerous to treat every perspective as if they are equally valuable to public discourse. I'd put White Supremacist and Antifa in that category. Unfortunately, this QAnon has become more dangerous that the rest of the extremes put together. There is no law that says any private entity must give them access to the platform. You can't criticize them for curating their content than concurrently threaten their Section 230 protections. What most don't understand is that absent 230, platforms would be much more militant in censorship because they'd be liable for the actions/statements of the users.

It should be pointed out that Michael Flynn called for Trump to implement martial law and have the military force another vote. He did this publicly and on twitter. Flynn's extreme views demonstrate he's too careless to deserve a following that can only be reached on Twitter.

 

[mb227]

You're the lawyer but none of that has anything to do with the 1st amendment and it's infamous Freedom of Speech. Hasn't Twitter already come out in favor of Section 230 changes?

Why are you incapable of looking big picture. Suppression of speech includes suppression beyond the traditional scope of #1A. And now Apple is threatening to block Parler.

The reality is that there is indeed a movement afoot to suppress the speech and content of anyone that the left disapproves of in a variety of mediums.

 

[OUBubba]

Parler and these other sites were used by the adversaries of the US to foment dissension and led to what we saw this week. Kill it.

 

[Garmel]

Parler and these other sites were used by the adversaries of the US to foment dissension and led to what we saw this week. Kill it.

Aren't you the one that loves the term "sieg heil"? God damn, dude.

 

[OUBubba]

Aren't you the one that loves the term "sieg heil"? God damn, dude.

How have you not put me on ignore yet, mein fuhrer?

Not sure why I'd think that: New Illinois congresswoman: ‘Hitler was right on one thing’

 

[Garmel]

How have you not put me on ignore yet, mein fuhrer?

Not sure why I'd think that: New Illinois congresswoman: ‘Hitler was right on one thing’

You don't even realize the point I was making, do you? You're the one that sounds like a fascist, not me. We don't get rid of things that we don't like in this country. There's been a shitload more violence from the left than the right this year so I guess we should get rid of the left leaning Facebook since its responsible for the violence. That's what you sound like, bud.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Why are you incapable of looking big picture. Suppression of speech includes suppression beyond the traditional scope of #1A. And now Apple is threatening to block Parler.

The reality is that there is indeed a movement afoot to suppress the speech and content of anyone that the left disapproves of in a variety of mediums.

It's all perspective. The problem with the Internet as it exists today is misinformation is too prevalent. As we've seen, blatant lies of the election being "stolen" is having a very real impact on the gullible. Before the Internet the purveyors of BS like this didn't have the reach. They might be able to print up some flyers and put them on cars or publish some arcane newsletter that might have a few thousand subscribers. Roger Stone used to boast of dirty tactics like this. Now BS artists like Stone and his ilk create a hashtag, purchase bots to push it and suddenly #StopTheSteal is trending. We KNOW the platform is being used by our enemies, without and within. Twitter, Facebook and other platforms allowed these propagandists to reach millions. Pushing these views back into the bowels of the internet (e.g. 8kun) is where these views belong. If not, we open ourselves up to populism and authoritarianism like we've seen the past 4 years.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Trump is now permanently suspended from Twitter.

"After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account," the company wrote in a blog post.

What does this mean? Trump's tweets are being used to fuel terrorism **** in other sites. Look no further than Apple just giving Parler a 24hr ultimatum to implement a moderation policy or they'll be removed from the Itunes store. Reddit banned the subreddit r/DonaldTrump today. The big tech companies are no longer going to sit idle while darker parts of Donald Trump's supporters use them to organize, recruit and heaven forbid act on their crazy notions.

 

[OrangeShogun]

I'm generally not in favor of giving large platforms to extremist views. It's dangerous to treat every perspective as if they are equally valuable to public discourse. I'd put White Supremacist and Antifa in that category. Unfortunately, this QAnon has become more dangerous that the rest of the extremes put together. There is no law that says any private entity must give them access to the platform. You can't criticize them for curating their content than concurrently threaten their Section 230 protections. What most don't understand is that absent 230, platforms would be much more militant in censorship because they'd be liable for the actions/statements of the users.

It should be pointed out that Michael Flynn called for Trump to implement martial law and have the military force another vote. He did this publicly and on twitter. Flynn's extreme views demonstrate he's too careless to deserve a following that can only be reached on Twitter.

It's all perspective. The problem with the Internet as it exists today is misinformation is too prevalent. As we've seen, blatant lies of the election being "stolen" is having a very real impact on the gullible. Before the Internet the purveyors of BS like this didn't have the reach. They might be able to print up some flyers and put them on cars or publish some arcane newsletter that might have a few thousand subscribers. Roger Stone used to boast of dirty tactics like this. Now BS artists like Stone and his ilk create a hashtag, purchase bots to push it and suddenly #StopTheSteal is trending. We KNOW the platform is being used by our enemies, without and within. Twitter, Facebook and other platforms allowed these propagandists to reach millions. Pushing these views back into the bowels of the internet (e.g. 8kun) is where these views belong. If not, we open ourselves up to populism and authoritarianism like we've seen the past 4 years.

This all sounds like rationalization/justification for the Thought Police.

 

[mchammer]

 

[Statalyzer]

All they are gonna do is make him into a martyr. We all know, by simple comparison to stuff they have allowed, that this isn't about principles.

 

[theiioftx]

Parler and these other sites were used by the adversaries of the US to foment dissension and led to what we saw this week. Kill it.

C’mon bubba. You are better than that. Kill free speech? This will lead to a civil war. Nobody wants that.

 

[mchammer]

Mexico's President Blasts Twitter & Facebook For Acting Like "Holy Inquisition" In Censoring Trump | ZeroHedge

 

[Monahorns]

Parler and these other sites were used by the adversaries of the US to foment dissension and led to what we saw this week. Kill it.

Now Bubba and Seattle have both stated their approval of censoring and eliminating free speech in our country.

You have no claims to being American anymore. You are both now fascists. The mask is off. You are equal to QAnon too. Censoring speech will lead to violence just as soon as their conspiracies or Trump's tweets.

And the politicians you vote for murder babies and have coordinated the American version of Mao's Cultural Revolution. God have mercy on us if they copy the Great Leap Forward, many will die.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Now Bubba and Seattle have both stated their approval of censoring and eliminating free speech in our country.

You have no claims to being American anymore. You are both now fascists. The mask is off. You are equal to QAnon too. Censoring speech will lead to violence just as soon as their conspiracies or Trump's tweets.

And the politicians you vote for murder babies and have coordinated the American version of Mao's Cultural Revolution. God have mercy on us if they copy the Great Leap Forward, many will die.

Free speech on private platforms doesn't exist.

Can I come to your house, sit in your living room and give speech whenever I please? Maybe when you have a party? No? How dare you restrict my free speech. You are clearly a fascist masquerading as a Libertarian.

See, I can be absurd to prove a point also. Seriously, actually reread the first amendment then tell me what role the government plays in the relationship between Twitter and it's customers.

 

[Monahorns]

If your not for free speech. I am not going to listen to anything you say. You are being absurd yourself equating social media to a living room. Social media is a public space. You know that.

Free speech is not just a political virtue but a cultural future. Your comments show once again that you don't value it. A culture that doesn't value free speech will not require free speech in the political realm either.

The Founders couldn't imagine that private individuals would against free speech as a principle. They were only concerned that the government would violate that right.

You've shown your nature, live with it.

 

[Monahorns]

Also, the first thing Lenin did when he took over the government was took over every newspaper by force. You can't draw that solid of a line between the two. You can't separate speech from the distribution of that speech, without being a tyrant.

 

[Seattle Husker]

If your not for free speech. I am not going to listen to anything you say. You are being absurd yourself equating social media to a living room. Social media is a public space. You know that.

Free speech is not just a political virtue but a cultural future. Your comments show once again that you don't value it. A culture that doesn't value free speech will not require free speech in the political realm either.

The Founders couldn't imagine that private individuals would against free speech as a principle. They were only concerned that the government would violate that right.

You've shown your nature, live with it.

You don't like your living room? Walk into a home depot and start shouting that the election was stolen by the commie liberals then ***** when you are escorted out of the store. I'm shocked that someone that professes Libertarian values wants to dictate to corporations how they should treat their customers. Rather that free speech you NEED to espouse free market but then maybe your love of free markets aren't as strong as your desire to dictate rules to companies, huh? The Libertarian answer is to find another social media company that treats you the way you want to be treated, but then you may not be what you profess to be when it impacts your political views.

 

[Monahorns]

I don't think the government should force corporations to set their own rules.

But corporations that are biased Marxists and censor speech are unAmerican and will destroy our nation. Just like you.

The Libertarian answer is to find another social media company that treats you the way you want to be treated, but then you may not be what you profess to be when it impacts your political views.

You don't understand libertarians very well. I have every right to criticize the bad behavior of companies. I have never promoted the government forcing behavior.

When Apple disallows Parler. When ISPs won't allow access to conservative speech. When banks won't allow people to purchase the media or subscriptions that they want, there is practically no option. That is why the culture is important. Libertarians need to fight for a culture of freedom. Without at culture of freedom laws won't matter and there will be no options. That isn't freedom. That's tyranny. But you don't care. Tyranny is okay to you. Your masks off.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Joe Fan]

And then they came for Rush

Same question from the other thread - who are the modern fascists?

 

[theiioftx]

Trump is now permanently suspended from Twitter.



What does this mean? Trump's tweets are being used to fuel terrorism **** in other sites. Look no further than Apple just giving Parler a 24hr ultimatum to implement a moderation policy or they'll be removed from the Itunes store. Reddit banned the subreddit r/DonaldTrump today. The big tech companies are no longer going to sit idle while darker parts of Donald Trump's supporters use them to organize, recruit and heaven forbid act on their crazy notions.

I hate free speech too.

 

[2003TexasGrad]

Can I come to your house, sit in your living room and give speech whenever I please?

If I invite you over to my house along with 10 other people to have a round table discussion yes! That's literally what Twitter is.

 

[Joe Fan]

And then they came for Rush
Same question from the other thread - who are the modern fascists?

"To whom do you award the right to decide which speech is harmful or who is the harmful speaker? To whom would you delegate the task of deciding for you what you could read?"

— Christopher Hitchens​

 

[Joe Fan]

"To whom do you award the right to decide which speech is harmful or who is the harmful speaker? To whom would you delegate the task of deciding for you what you could read?"

— Christopher Hitchens​

Not this guy

 

[Joe Fan]

Hitchen's word have great application from what we see out of the fascistic left right now in the US
Would be great to still have him around for this

"The ability to express ourselves freely is fundamental to a free society... the freedom to publish, to satirise, to joke, to criticise, even when that might cause offence to others.

Those who wish to silence free speech must never be allowed to prevail"​

 

[Joe Fan]

"The ability to express ourselves freely is fundamental to a free society... the freedom to publish, to satirise, to joke, to criticise, even when that might cause offence to others.
Those who wish to silence free speech must never be allowed to prevail"​

If you accept Hitchens' statement on free speech as true, as I do, then the people currently opposed to freedom to publish, to satirise, to joke, to criticise, even when that might cause offence to others are not committed to a free society.

Who does that describe in the USA right now?

Who does that describe on this board right now?

Next question, if they are not committed to a free society, as I say they are not, then what are they committed to?
I would point to the Chinese model
Full control of everything and everyone