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

[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

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.

We heard your bullshit 1000 times. You already know why it's bullshit. Time to stop arguing and start shooting.

 

[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.

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.

Who cares how you see it? You're a lying douchebag.

 

[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

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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

 

[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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Fine. The cancel Rule 230. How can you douchebags be opposed to stopping government intereference in the market when you claim to support the free market?

 

[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

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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Fine. The cancel Rule 230. How can you douchebags be opposed to stopping government intereference in the market when you claim to support the free market?

You didn't answer my question. Do you want this site to have to approve every post before they are posted?

 

[Dragonlady]

These Censorious Social Media Bastards do not fit in our Free Society.

Of course they do. Freedom means that they are not obligated to support your message.

Freedom to speak also means freedom to not speak.

So you support giant corporations denying public services in order enforce political viewpoint compliance?

Public service?

It’s Facebook, not electricity. Get some perspective.

Neither are stores, motels, hotels, or bakers.

You sure? How am I supposed to eat if I can’t got to a store or place that serves food?

Seems like eating is a pretty vital thing.

Not to mention that public accommodation laws don’t protect people from discrimination based on political ideology.

So you are good with banks refusing to do business with people over their political viewpoint?

What about red lining Red or Blue Neighborhoods?

And Educator was fired for posting this on her OWN personal social media

View attachment 429563
​

Do you support firing her for that?

If you publically publically publish a racist point of view, and you are an "educator", yes you should be fired. Whether it is your personal social media page or not. If you wrote it and posted it, you're gone.

Point out what is racist in this post:

View attachment 429619

Everything. Here whole point of view. “If Black Lives Matter”, which she repeatedly starts sentences with is a direct statement by this woman that black lives don’t matter, at least not to her.

The fact that YOU don’t see it, shows just how racist YOU are and why there is a systemic race problem that doesn’t go away.

 

[Dragonlady]

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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Fine. The cancel Rule 230. How can you douchebags be opposed to stopping government intereference in the market when you claim to support the free market?

Cancel rule 230 and you can’t call everyone a moron anymore because we will sue you fat ass into bankruptcy.

 

[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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Fine. The cancel Rule 230. How can you douchebags be opposed to stopping government intereference in the market when you claim to support the free market?

Cancel rule 230 and you can’t call everyone a moron anymore because we will sue you fat ass into bankruptcy.

News outlets call politicians morons all the time, moron.

 

[Zorro!]

These Censorious Social Media Bastards do not fit in our Free Society.

Of course they do. Freedom means that they are not obligated to support your message.

Freedom to speak also means freedom to not speak.

So you support giant corporations denying public services in order enforce political viewpoint compliance?

Public service?

It’s Facebook, not electricity. Get some perspective.

Neither are stores, motels, hotels, or bakers.

You sure? How am I supposed to eat if I can’t got to a store or place that serves food?

Seems like eating is a pretty vital thing.

Not to mention that public accommodation laws don’t protect people from discrimination based on political ideology.

So you are good with banks refusing to do business with people over their political viewpoint?

What about red lining Red or Blue Neighborhoods?

And Educator was fired for posting this on her OWN personal social media

View attachment 429563
​

Do you support firing her for that?

If you publically publically publish a racist point of view, and you are an "educator", yes you should be fired. Whether it is your personal social media page or not. If you wrote it and posted it, you're gone.

Point out what is racist in this post:

View attachment 429619

Everything. Here whole point of view. “If Black Lives Matter”, which she repeatedly starts sentences with is a direct statement by this woman that black lives don’t matter, at least not to her.

The fact that YOU don’t see it, shows just how racist YOU are and why there is a systemic race problem that doesn’t go away.

Oh bullshit. She is aptly illustrating the internal contradictions of the mantra and rather than deal with perfectly valid points, she is silenced via slander as a "racist". You have no idea how fed up Americans are with your slanderous censorship and endless and varied ways of punishing others for free thought and expression.

You can be smart and talk a little less and listen a little more, or, you can continue to push until the blow back flattens you.

Don't mistake the deep tolerance of Americans for complacency.

We've about had it with the small-minded self-righteous scolds trying to impose their views on others through coercion rather than the thoughtful and intelligent exchange of ideas in the public square.

 

[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.

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

You claim to be a libertarian and don't even understand the basic concept of liberty. Liberty doesn't mean you can force others to accommodate you. Freedom of speech means the government can't silence you. It doesn't mean that you can force Facebook to host your idiocy.

 

[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.

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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Bri is not a libertarian.

 

[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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Bri is not a libertarian.

Spits the FAUX libertarian who voted for the senile pedophile.

 

[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

You claim to be a libertarian and don't even understand the basic concept of liberty. Liberty doesn't mean you can force others to accommodate you. Freedom of speech means the government can't silence you. It doesn't mean that you can force Facebook to host your idiocy.

The government is protecting Google and Facebook and twitter, moron. You continually ignore that fact.

You're a fucking douche and you aren't a libertarian. No libertarian would prefer those commies Biden and Harris over Trump. It simply isn't possible.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Whats the goal here?

Suppress anger from the right befor the runoff senate race?

Force congress to break them up/strip them of protections?

Think they can permanently control public discourse if they just keep the propaganda machine oiled with the fresh remains of the 1st amendment?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Seriously can't say this loud enough....

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

FUCK THESE COMPANIES! COMMIES

 

[dblack]

FUCK THESE COMPANIES! COMMIES

Dripping with ignorant irony.

 

[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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Fine. The cancel Rule 230. How can you douchebags be opposed to stopping government intereference in the market when you claim to support the free market?

Cancel rule 230 and you can’t call everyone a moron anymore because we will sue you fat ass into bankruptcy.

What's stopping you? Oh yeah, you aren't an American. Canada is the land with no freedom of speech.

 

[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

Being a Libertarian means you do not dictate how others run their companies.

Fine. The cancel Rule 230. How can you douchebags be opposed to stopping government intereference in the market when you claim to support the free market?

You didn't answer my question. Do you want this site to have to approve every post before they are posted?

Somehow they had political bulletin boards before rule 230. I know because I used to post on them.

 

[dblack]

#StopTheSqueal

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Whats the goal here?

Suppress anger from the right befor the runoff senate race?

Force congress to break them up/strip them of protections?

Think they can permanently control public discourse if they just keep the propaganda machine oiled with the fresh remains of the 1st amendment?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Seriously can't say this loud enough....

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

FUCK THESE COMPANIES! COMMIES

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Daryl Hunt says he can't defend his PROG-views so he'll sport a cartoon instead. Idiocracy is here