META (Facebook) Banning Conservatives over their opinions.....

[Curried Goats]

They claim to be an open platform, they are not.

I'm not sure what you think that means but all it means is that they're free to use, it does mean you have a right to use them. What you are using is basically Facebooks property and they have a right to not let you use it.

Many of the bans are really really not in line with their TOS, and when asked what a person did to get banned, more often than not they don't reply.

I don't really give a shit. Cry to someone who cares.

That is a contract violation, is it not?

If you think so go ahead and sue them and see how it goes.

 

[martybegan]

I'm not sure what you think that means but all it means is that they're free to use, it does mean you have a right to use them. What you are using is basically Facebooks property and they have a right to not let you use it.

I don't really give a shit. Cry to someone who cares.

If you think so go ahead and sue them and see how it goes.

All this just to make sure people you don't like don't get heard, and people who are on the fence on an argument only hear your side.

Pathetic.

 

[Circe]

They already have control of the media sites, we are losing.

That's the thing: I don't think it's pathetic ----- I think we're losing.

I know the people are furious, at least the non-leftists, but look at all the long sentences and the FBI raids, the political prisoners! The constant crime, the invasion of all of Latin America into our cities.

Being angry doesn't mean winning. I think we're losing. We haven't even started to fight: not even started.

 

[dblack]

We are way past that point.

Enjoy your blindfold, I suggest a Lucky Strike as your cigarette choice.

Sorry - I don't buy "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em", which is essentially your argument. If Republicans want to use state power to beat the leftists, then they are just as bad as the leftists, and they won't get my vote.

Do you seriously not understand that every tool you claim for government, in the name of fighting leftists, will be available for them to use against you?

 

[Curried Goats]

All this just to make sure people you don't like don't get heard, and people who are on the fence on an argument only hear your side.

Pathetic.

There are many different ways to look at this issue and you manage to be an idiot in all of them. Amazing.

One way to look it at is as a philosophical issue. Should entities have a right to associate or not associate with who they want? I think they should but you might have a different opinion, fair enough.

Another is from a legal standpoint. Did Facebook violate their terms of service when they banned you. My guess is no because they have enough money to hire fancy lawyers who'll word their TOS in a manner that will leave them free to ban almost anybody they want, but you can always try your luck.

The most recent standpoint, which you bring up here, the political strategy standpoint, well even in that you are a cuck. Nothing pathetic in disabling or disrupting your enemies communication or running more effective propaganda. That's how you win wars you dipshit.

 

[Circe]

That's ridiculous. Private citizens have no legal authority to wield violence. Government does. That's why we put government on a short leash. It would seem you want everyone on a short leash.

Oh, this leftist government is DEFINITELY not on a short leash! When we've got political prisoners, FBI raids like the SS and Stasi, when we've got a massive crime wave encouraged, not stopped, by the government and a massive invasion of the United States from the South and a recession, yeah, this is no government under control!
This is a government trying to destroy the country it wants to rule and can't rule unless we are destroyed.

 

[dblack]

Oh, this leftist government is DEFINITELY not on a short leash!

I hear you. I'm not saying we shouldn't fight back against corruption. I'm saying we shouldn't create a regulatory regime that will only further their interests, further their control.

You realize that the left is working on the same agenda as you, right? They're doing it with the excuse of cracking down on "misinformation", rather than going after bias, but the end game is the same. Social media has a lot of power to influence society, and politicians want in on the game.

 

[martybegan]

That's the thing: I don't think it's pathetic ----- I think we're losing.

I know the people are furious, at least the non-leftists, but look at all the long sentences and the FBI raids, the political prisoners! The constant crime, the invasion of all of Latin America into our cities.

Being angry doesn't mean winning. I think we're losing. We haven't even started to fight: not even started.

Getting social media sites to stop favoring one side would be a start.

 

[martybegan]

Sorry - I don't buy "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em", which is essentially your argument. If Republicans want to use state power to beat the leftists, then they are just as bad as the leftists, and they won't get my vote.

Do you seriously not understand that every tool you claim for government, in the name of fighting leftists, will be available for them to use against you?

We would use the power to FIX an imbalance, they use it to INCREASE the imbalance.

A narrowly constructed law isn't like Gandalf trying to wield the One Ring, it's a response to a situation that threatens our country.

 

[martybegan]

There are many different ways to look at this issue and you manage to be an idiot in all of them. Amazing.

One way to look it at is as a philosophical issue. Should entities have a right to associate or not associate with who they want? I think they should but you might have a different opinion, fair enough.

Another is from a legal standpoint. Did Facebook violate their terms of service when they banned you. My guess is no because they have enough money to hire fancy lawyers who'll word their TOS in a manner that will leave them free to ban almost anybody they want, but you can always try your luck.

The most recent standpoint, which you bring up here, the political strategy standpoint, well even in that you are a cuck. Nothing pathetic in disabling or disrupting your enemies communication or running more effective propaganda. That's how you win wars you dipshit.

All your typing and it doesn't remove the fact you are ONLY OK with this because your side gets the advantage. Anything else you type is utter bullshit.

 

[Curried Goats]

All your typing and it doesn't remove the fact you are ONLY OK with this because your side gets the advantage. Anything else you type is utter bullshit.

Bullshit. That's you cuckservative perspective, don't try and pass that Soy Boy bullshit on to me. As I said I don't give a shit who Facebook bans nor do I care when this place bans me. Obviously you sit in your room and cry for days.

 

[dblack]

We would use the power to FIX an imbalance, they use it to INCREASE the imbalance.

Exactly. You fix the imbalance when your side is in power, they fix it back when they're in power. Government shouldn't be dictating to media. That's the whole fucking point of the First.

A narrowly constructed law isn't like Gandalf trying to wield the One Ring, it's a response to a situation that threatens our country.

Well, liberals are coming with some "narrowly constructed" laws to keep "misinformation" off the internet. I'm sure they're counting on your support.

 

[martybegan]

Bullshit. That's you cuckservative perspective, don't try and pass that Soy Boy bullshit on to me. As I said I don't give a shit who Facebook bans nor do I care when this place bans me. Obviously you sit in your room and cry for days.

It's the only reason you care this vehemently about it. your SJW disdain for corporations is outweighed by your pathetic hatred of those you disagree with being able to spread their opinions.

 

[martybegan]

Exactly. You fix the imbalance when your side is in power, they fix it back when they're in power. Government shouldn't be dictating to media. That's the whole fucking point of the First.



Well, liberals are coming with some "narrowly constructed" laws to keep "misinformation" off the internet. I'm sure they're counting on your support.

Those won't be narrowly constructed.

And there is a difference between a law that says "don't limit" and a law that says "limit"

 

[Curried Goats]

It's the only reason you care this vehemently about it. your SJW disdain for corporations is outweighed by your pathetic hatred of those you disagree with being able to spread their opinions.

I actually don't care other than as amusing entertainment watching you clowns cry about not being invited to sit at the cool kids table.

 

[martybegan]

I actually don't care other than as amusing entertainment watching you clowns cry about not being invited to sit at the cool kids table.

Figures some beta level transference going on with you.

 

[dblack]

Those won't be narrowly constructed.

And there is a difference between a law that says "don't limit" and a law that says "limit"

Yes, yes, yes. "It's different when we do it".


You know, I think that bottom line here is that all consideration of genuine political convictions has given way to fighting the "culture wars". Both sides agree that the government is there to force their preferences on their neighbors, and now they're just fighting it out.

 

[martybegan]

Yes, yes, yes. "It's different when we do it".


You know, I think that bottom line here is that all consideration of genuine political convictions has given way to fighting the "culture wars". Both sides agree that the government is there to force their preferences on their neighbors, and now they're just fighting it out.

How is opening up discussion forcing anything?

Facebook already says it's not their content.

 

[Curried Goats]

Figures some beta level transference going on with you.

That's basically what you're doing clown show.

 

[martybegan]

That's basically what you're doing clown show.

Pee Wee Herman retort noted, and laughed at.