The election is over so why is social media still banning/deleting posts they deem wrong?

[pknopp]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

 

[Zorro!]

Any use of government is an abuse.

Nope. Protecting individual rights is a valid use of government. Ask a libertarian.

Name one government that ever limited itself to protecting individual rights.

when done coming up to ZERO on that, ask them to name a time government gave rights back to the people after taking them.

Via Article V, the State Legislatures reversed Prohibition.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

 

[Indeependent]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

Heretic!
pknopp knows everything!

 

[pknopp]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

I can list legislation all day. Means nothing.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

I can list legislation all day. Means nothing.

Of course it means nothing to you because you don't grasp the implications

 

[pknopp]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

I can list legislation all day. Means nothing.

Of course it means nothing to you because you don't grasp the implications

One can not grasp what is not there.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

I can list legislation all day. Means nothing.

Of course it means nothing to you because you don't grasp the implications

One can not grasp what is not there.

YOU said they get no special treatment. I PROVED you wrong with the actual law.

Go troll elsewhere fool.

 

[pknopp]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

I can list legislation all day. Means nothing.

Of course it means nothing to you because you don't grasp the implications

One can not grasp what is not there.

YOU said they get no special treatment. I PROVED you wrong with the actual law.

Go troll elsewhere fool.

I can post legislation and pretend it does something also.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

I can list legislation all day. Means nothing.

Of course it means nothing to you because you don't grasp the implications

One can not grasp what is not there.

YOU said they get no special treatment. I PROVED you wrong with the actual law.

Go troll elsewhere fool.

I can post legislation and pretend it does something also.

Ignorance is not a free pass.


Anyhow, you and I are done here.

 

[iceberg]

Any use of government is an abuse.

Nope. Protecting individual rights is a valid use of government. Ask a libertarian.

Name one government that ever limited itself to protecting individual rights.

when done coming up to ZERO on that, ask them to name a time government gave rights back to the people after taking them.

Via Article V, the State Legislatures reversed Prohibition.

well glad we didn't have to go too far back then.

 

[dblack]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

Feeble excuse. This whole issue is about punishing companies who won't support Trump. Fuck that.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

Feeble excuse. This whole issue is about punishing companies who won't support Trump. Fuck that.

For some perhaps. Not me

 

[dblack]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

Feeble excuse. This whole issue is about punishing companies who won't support Trump. Fuck that.

For some perhaps. Not me

Was "Section 230" on your radar before FB and Twitter defied Trump?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

Feeble excuse. This whole issue is about punishing companies who won't support Trump. Fuck that.

For some perhaps. Not me

Was "Section 230" on your radar before FB and Twitter defied Trump?

Fair point. But to be fair I neither knew about the protections or ever experienced their absurd censorship

 

[dblack]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

Feeble excuse. This whole issue is about punishing companies who won't support Trump. Fuck that.

For some perhaps. Not me

Was "Section 230" on your radar before FB and Twitter defied Trump?

Fair point. But to be fair I neither knew about the protections or ever experienced their absurd censorship

I won't second guess your motivations, but here's how I've seen the debate develop. 1. Tech companies crack down on Trump's trolling. 2. Trump is provoked to do what he always does and "strike back". 3. Trumpsters go to work looking for a way to "go after" social media companies who are censoring crackpots. 4. Section 230 is chosen as the lead argument.

In another situation, with different people and different circumstances, I might take the debate over section 230 seriously. It's an important legal question. But the fact of the matter is that it's not a genuine concern of Trump, nor his supporters. It's just a threat, an act of retaliation from a wannabe tyrant.

 

[pknopp]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

I can list legislation all day. Means nothing.

Of course it means nothing to you because you don't grasp the implications

One can not grasp what is not there.

YOU said they get no special treatment. I PROVED you wrong with the actual law.

Go troll elsewhere fool.

You provided a law. You made no argument about the law. About what it does and how it affects anything. Anyone can censor whatever they want as long as they are not the government. Everything censors. Newspapers, Television, radio, etc. Everything.

I can not add content on my own on Television. On a Newspaper. On the radio. All 230 does is state that since people can indeed add whatever they want to the internet, host sites aren't held personally responsible.

Do you really want a site like this to have to read and approve everything written before it gets posted?

You listed this law BUT made NO argument about it.

 

[JoeB131]

No they can't moron. Republicans can't post videos to youTube

Really?

Check it out.. I had no problem finding videos from Prager U.

 

[bripat9643]

Now you are arguing for authoritarian big government actions to address this still?

Protecting every Americans first amendment CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is the antithesis of authoritarian.

You need to take a class on the 1st Amendment and stop being a hypocrite on your support for big authoritarian governments.

No, the internet needs to be regulated under the FCC as a public square because THATS WHAT IT IS.

See, you did know what I was saying. You are a huge supporter of big authoritarian government.

How is removing special carve outs for social media authoritarian???

I'm beginning to think you don't know what that word means.

There is no special carve outs. You want to create special restrictions on them.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Get educated

Feeble excuse. This whole issue is about punishing companies who won't support Trump. Fuck that.

Wrong, asshole. It's about freedom of speech. These companies are censoring Trump. You claim to be a libertarian, but you're obviously just a Trump hating douche

 

[bripat9643]

No they can't moron. Republicans can't post videos to youTube

Really?

Check it out.. I had no problem finding videos from Prager U.

Find a video by Alex Jones.