Latest Round of Censorship from the Left

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Absolutely unacceptable. The civilization haters are at it again.



Many people have been banned from youtube for the crime of having the wrong (pro president Trump) opinion also. I suppose everyone knew this was coming, the left can not be negotiated with... but... are the conservatives going to finally do something about it or just continue losing with style?

Establishment Republicans love to lose with style.

A new chapter is being written in America.

They will be guillotined first, even before the leftist pawns, but at least they will go out with all their principles so... no problem?

When does this start?

As soon as the leftists have the power to do so.

Ah, so this is just another stupid, pointless, masturbatory fantasy of yours, correct? You're still the same know nothing useless twat, correct?

I was hoping you would volunteer. You got my hopes up for nothing.

They have admitted as much. The only one fantasizing is you. The fantasy of communism that actually works, is that it?

Nope, just believe you're a know nothing twat.

 

[colfax_m]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

 

[Norman]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are against freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

 

[colfax_m]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

 

[Norman]

Live talking about the issue.

 

[Norman]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable. It is not illegal to be stupid, but I rather have you create your own thread for the stupidity and nonsense.

 

[colfax_m]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

 

[Norman]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

I am applying the standard of "do you support free speech or not" on leftists.

It is pretty FUCKING simple, and makes PERFECT SENSE in a country whose first amendment is dedicated to free speech. No, they do not pass the standard.

Go away moronic troll.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable. It is not illegal to be stupid, but I rather have you create your own thread for the stupidity and nonsense.

Wingers are like toddlers. Throwing tantrums when they get their online toys taken away for violating terms of service. You aren't smart enough to know you basically signed a contract with these platforms when you signed up to use them. That means you agreed to 'play ball' by their rules when engaging in said platform. You aren't smart enough to understand this even when repeatedly reminded. So fuck your gripes.

If you are dumb enough to get kicked off a platform because you can't self censor your hate speech, well your binky gets taken away, little one.

I have zero sympathy for you.

 

[Norman]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable. It is not illegal to be stupid, but I rather have you create your own thread for the stupidity and nonsense.

Wingers are like toddlers. Throwing tantrums when they get their online toys taken away for violating terms of service. You aren't smart enough to know you basically signed a contract with these platforms when you signed up to use them. That means you agreed to 'play ball' by their rules when engaging in said platform. You aren't smart enough to understand this even when repeatedly reminded. So fuck your gripes.

If you are dumb enough to get kicked off a platform because you can't self censor your hate speech, well your binky gets taken away, little one.

I have zero sympathy for you.

Toddler is smarter than a Dumbling.

And definitely smarter than a toddler dumbling. Are you 13 years old? That's how your message comes across. If you only wish to troll and have nothing to contribute as you don't to society, go do that elsewhere.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable. It is not illegal to be stupid, but I rather have you create your own thread for the stupidity and nonsense.

Wingers are like toddlers. Throwing tantrums when they get their online toys taken away for violating terms of service. You aren't smart enough to know you basically signed a contract with these platforms when you signed up to use them. That means you agreed to 'play ball' by their rules when engaging in said platform. You aren't smart enough to understand this even when repeatedly reminded. So fuck your gripes.

If you are dumb enough to get kicked off a platform because you can't self censor your hate speech, well your binky gets taken away, little one.

I have zero sympathy for you.

Toddler is smarter than a dumbling.

You know I'm right, little one. That's why you're having a tantrum.

 

[colfax_m]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

I am applying the standard of "do you support free speech or not" on leftists.

It is pretty FUCKING simple, and makes PERFECT SENSE in a country whose first amendment is dedicated to free speech. No, they do not pass the standard.

Go away moronic troll.

Your standard of supporting free speech is ridiculous as I’ve been pointing out. Something you refuse to address.

Supporting free speech does not mean you are required to private it for anyone else.

 

[Norman]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

I am applying the standard of "do you support free speech or not" on leftists.

It is pretty FUCKING simple, and makes PERFECT SENSE in a country whose first amendment is dedicated to free speech. No, they do not pass the standard.

Go away moronic troll.

Your standard of supporting free speech is ridiculous as I’ve been pointing out. Something you refuse to address.

Supporting free speech does not mean you are required to private it for anyone else.

Yes, my standard which is more or less the definition of free speech is ridiculous... I know I know...

Or perhaps it's that you are ridiculously anti-American and against free speech. Go away moron.

These people believe bakery should bake the cake, but speech platform does not need to host the speech. Ridiculous, ridiculous.... they are fundamentally evil bad people.

 

[colfax_m]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

I am applying the standard of "do you support free speech or not" on leftists.

It is pretty FUCKING simple, and makes PERFECT SENSE in a country whose first amendment is dedicated to free speech. No, they do not pass the standard.

Go away moronic troll.

Your standard of supporting free speech is ridiculous as I’ve been pointing out. Something you refuse to address.

Supporting free speech does not mean you are required to private it for anyone else.

Yes, my standard which is more or less the definition of free speech is ridiculous... I know I know...

Or perhaps it's that you are ridiculously anti-American and against free speech. Go away moron.

These people believe bakery should bake the cake, but speech platform does not need to host the speech. Ridiculous, ridiculous.... these people are fundamentally evil bad people.

What part of free speech requires others pay for that speech?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

I am applying the standard of "do you support free speech or not" on leftists.

It is pretty FUCKING simple, and makes PERFECT SENSE in a country whose first amendment is dedicated to free speech. No, they do not pass the standard.

Go away moronic troll.

Your standard of supporting free speech is ridiculous as I’ve been pointing out. Something you refuse to address.

Supporting free speech does not mean you are required to private it for anyone else.

Yes, my standard which is more or less the definition of free speech is ridiculous... I know I know...

Or perhaps it's that you are ridiculously anti-American and against free speech. Go away moron.

These people believe bakery should bake the cake, but speech platform does not need to host the speech. Ridiculous, ridiculous.... these people are fundamentally evil bad people.

What part of free speech requires others pay for that speech?

Oops. That'll break their fragile toddler brains.

 

[Norman]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

I am applying the standard of "do you support free speech or not" on leftists.

It is pretty FUCKING simple, and makes PERFECT SENSE in a country whose first amendment is dedicated to free speech. No, they do not pass the standard.

Go away moronic troll.

Your standard of supporting free speech is ridiculous as I’ve been pointing out. Something you refuse to address.

Supporting free speech does not mean you are required to private it for anyone else.

Yes, my standard which is more or less the definition of free speech is ridiculous... I know I know...

Or perhaps it's that you are ridiculously anti-American and against free speech. Go away moron.

These people believe bakery should bake the cake, but speech platform does not need to host the speech. Ridiculous, ridiculous.... these people are fundamentally evil bad people.

What part of free speech requires others pay for that speech?

Are you saying that the banned people did not pay for the service just like others on the platform? There is no evidence that they refused paying any service fees that apply. They were not thrown out for their lack of payment, but because the content of their opinions.

Bake the cake, and HOST the speech.

 

[hadit]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

Perhaps it would help if we put this into the context of public access demands such as faced by the infamous bakers, who did not want their business products used to celebrate an idea they found repugnant. When that happened, the usual suspects went completely bonkers, demanded that the business be punished severely, didn't care that there were many other businesses glad to work with the offended customers, and insisted that the business owners had better keep their private opinions completely separated from their business, or else. These sites are selling a product (a platform on which to express ideas), but want to pick and choose what ideas are expressed, much like the bakers wished to pick and choose how their products were used. Not a perfect analogy and not meant to be, but this is shaping up to be a classic case of how much control a business has over who uses their product and how it's used. The fact that the product in this case is a messaging platform and not baked goods is ultimately irrelevant.

It's kind of interesting to watch the flip flopping. Those who self righteously demanded that the bakers be forced to have their products used in ways they found repugnant now want a private business to be able to refuse service to those whose ideas offend the business owners. On the other side we have those who wanted the bakers protected now wanting the messaging platform owners forced to accommodate ideas they find repugnant.

 

[colfax_m]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

I am applying the standard of "do you support free speech or not" on leftists.

It is pretty FUCKING simple, and makes PERFECT SENSE in a country whose first amendment is dedicated to free speech. No, they do not pass the standard.

Go away moronic troll.

Your standard of supporting free speech is ridiculous as I’ve been pointing out. Something you refuse to address.

Supporting free speech does not mean you are required to private it for anyone else.

Yes, my standard which is more or less the definition of free speech is ridiculous... I know I know...

Or perhaps it's that you are ridiculously anti-American and against free speech. Go away moron.

These people believe bakery should bake the cake, but speech platform does not need to host the speech. Ridiculous, ridiculous.... these people are fundamentally evil bad people.

What part of free speech requires others pay for that speech?

Are you saying that the banned people did not pay for the service just like others on the platform? There is no evidence that they refused paying any service fees that apply. They were not thrown out for their lack of payment, but because the content of their opinions.

Bake the cake, and HOST the speech.

It’s a comment about the platforms, not the users. Don’t switch the subject.

Running YouTube is expensive. You’re demanding that YouTube (or any other platform) to propagate all speech otherwise you’ll label them anti-free speech

So I’ll ask you again, what part of freedom of speech requires someone pay to propagate someone else’s speech?

 

[Billiejeens]

If you are running a public platform and not allowing everybody to participate, you are anti freedom of speech

Nope. You’re welcome to express your own speech on your own property or at your own cost.

Some people just want to be freeloaders and force others to propagate their speech. That’s not how it works in a free country.

You are free to eat as much food as you want, doesn't mean you aren't a fatass.

You are free to destroy 14 years of philosophy in a gigantic book burning, does not mean you aren't anti freedom of speech.

This is not very difficult for someone with an IQ over 80, which excludes most leftists apparently. Of course in this case the legality of matter is not so straight forward. Youtube may have violated the Canadian law, where discriminating based on political ideology is illegal.

This isn’t about first amendment. This is about people demanding something for free and getting pissed that the platforms don’t want to support their nonsense.

That’s it. End of story.

Bunch of lazy ass losers.

In the old days people would walk to the town square - that they didn't own or build, and were free to speak whatever they wished without fear of Government interference,
They were not getting somethin for free the town square was their public platform and were not thought to be lazy ass losers.

Today with the help of the Government, Platforms such as Facebook have replaced the public square.
Absolutely not possible to trust Zuckerberg and his algorithms to properly police the town square.

People like you would agree if, I dunno lets say Facebook put Steve Bannon in charge of the algorithms

 

[Billiejeens]

This thread has had its low IQ interventions, but this one takes the cake for the absolute pinnacle of stupidity. People getting banned over their speech and a clueless moron responds that no one is getting banned.

Getting banned from a website does not mean the speech is banned.

Anyone kicked off YouTube is welcome to publish their videos on their own. You know why? Because the speech is not banned.

This sounds like semantics but it’s a huge difference.

The freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak anywhere you want.

"Getting banned does not mean you are banned."

These messages just keep getting more and more brilliant. Again, getting banned for the wrong opinion is anti free-speech. This thread is not about that, we already know that to be a fact. If you need help with your low IQ create your own thread.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to exercise speech anywhere you want.

You know this to be true but you will not admit it. You will refuse to acknowledge it.

No.

It does mean you don't ban someone for exercising speech on a platform designed for expressing speech.

It’s a business. The platform is designed to make money.

You can’t even the fundamental purpose of the website right.

Irrelevant already dealt with nonsense. They are anti freedom of speech plain and simple, none of what you post changes any of that.

It’s extremely relevant. Who do you think pays to keep YouTube running?

HINT: It’s none of the people complaining about being kicked off. They’re freeloaders who demand that others pay for them.

It is completely irrelevant who keeps the platforms running when it comes to the fact on whether they are, or are not against free speech.

Perhaps you should have taken some logic classes, you had the right not to. But that does not mean you aren't illogical and unreasonable.

Except you’re applying a standard to the platforms that makes no sense.

Supporting free speech does not obligate you to pay for that speech to be propagated.

Because rights really only apply to rights that one has inherently, asking someone to subsidize your right makes it not an actual right, yes?