Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Umh, no. I provided an article to support my statement. You disagree, then substantiate your claim. It isn’t my job to do that.
www.forbes.com
But what views are they banning? Conservatives dominate liberals on social media, so they can’t be banning conservatives simply because they are conservative.
That's a baldfaced lie.
You cannot in good faith tell me that conservatives dominate anything on social media or media in general. If true, Twitter and Facebook would not have just banned Trump from using their platforms.
I am not a tutor or a handholder, you can easily look for examples of this behavior on Google.
If you think it is a lie, show me the data to prove otherwise.
Dominate as in they are by far the most numerous users.
Trump was banned for his behavior not his political viewpoint.
An article from Politico is not ample proof of conservative dominance over popular media. How about --instead of making demands of me-- you provide you own empirical evidence to prove your case. You made the initial assertion, it is your obligation to prove it.
She is not arguing in good faith so I would stop it there. Claiming conservatives have dominance when Trump was just banned by the Stalinists - that is the usual leftist inversion... like the claims that women are stronger than men. The usual leftist tactic of trying to move the focus of the discussion to "well maybe women are only as strong as men?", so that they can hopefully continue their batshit lying as some cucks are unable to point to them that they are 360 degrees from reality.
But we do not fall for it. Social media is OBVIOUSLY far left dominated. The whole IDEA of social media and controlling people by words is a far left idea. Right wingers are producers and believe in reality, not socially constructed bullshit designed to mooch of other people
Private businesses banning free speech for political purposes can be more dangerous than violating the first ammendment.
Which begs the question, why did the capital police move the barrier to let them in then open the doors for them..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.
as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
Ya...they did..
'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media
Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.www.usatoday.com
Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready.
Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed.www.propublica.org
Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?
If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
You miis those questions.
Want quotes of them on Twitter? I can find them.Which begs the question, why did the capital police move the barrier to let them in then open the doors for them..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.
as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
Ya...they did..
'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media
Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.www.usatoday.com
Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready.
Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed.
Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?
If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
You miis those questions.
Yes. That is in my list of questions.
Here is another. Should ISIs be allowed free speech rights on these platforms?
And shouldn't it be up to our government to declare laws were broken and a platform "evil"?Which begs the question, why did the capital police move the barrier to let them in then open the doors for them..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.
as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
Ya...they did..
'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media
Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.www.usatoday.com
Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready.
Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed.
Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?
If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
You miis those questions.
Yes. That is in my list of questions.
Here is another. Should ISIs be allowed free speech rights on these platforms?
And where did Twitter claim that it had no restrictions on what could be posted there? Their TOS is very clear that there are restrictions.
help.twitter.com
Umh, no. I provided an article to support my statement. You disagree, then substantiate your claim. It isn’t my job to do that.
Okay, fine, let's go against the grain:
We’re Not Biased, We’re Liberals: How Cultural Leftism Will Slant Social Media Regulation
In today’s policy climate, mainstream media gets to maintain its biases and proclivities. Will non-conforming social media of the future retain that essential freedom?
Which begs the question, why did the capital police move the barrier to let them in then open the doors for them..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.
as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
Ya...they did..
'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media
Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.www.usatoday.com
Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready.
Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed.
Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?
If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
You miis those questions.
Yes. That is in my list of questions.
Here is another. Should ISIs be allowed free speech rights on these platforms?
And shouldn't it be up to our government to declare laws were broken and a platform "evil"?Which begs the question, why did the capital police move the barrier to let them in then open the doors for them..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.
as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
Ya...they did..
'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media
Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.www.usatoday.com
Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready.
Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed.
Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?
If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
You miis those questions.
Yes. That is in my list of questions.
Here is another. Should ISIs be allowed free speech rights on these platforms?
Since when did a "private business" have that power?
Umh, no. I provided an article to support my statement. You disagree, then substantiate your claim. It isn’t my job to do that.
Okay, fine, let's go against the grain:
We’re Not Biased, We’re Liberals: How Cultural Leftism Will Slant Social Media Regulation
In today’s policy climate, mainstream media gets to maintain its biases and proclivities. Will non-conforming social media of the future retain that essential freedom?
OK...but I am not quite seeing how it counters the article I posted (you may not like Politico, but it referenced an outside study) which showed conservative voices by far outnumbered liberals in social media.
And where did Twitter claim that it had no restrictions on what could be posted there? Their TOS is very clear that there are restrictions.
In your campaign to prove me wrong, you apparently did not bother to read the governing rules set forth by Twitter:
The Twitter Rules
Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.
The X rules: safety, privacy, authenticity, and more
Understand the limitations on the type of content and behavior that we allow, to ensure free and safe conversation.
Which begs the question, why did the capital police move the barrier to let them in then open the doors for them..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.
as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
Ya...they did..
'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media
Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.www.usatoday.com
Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready.
Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed.
Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?
If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
You miis those questions.
Yes. That is in my list of questions.
Here is another. Should ISIs be allowed free speech rights on these platforms?
They already are.
And where did Twitter claim that it had no restrictions on what could be posted there? Their TOS is very clear that there are restrictions.
In your campaign to prove me wrong, you apparently did not bother to read the governing rules set forth by Twitter:
The Twitter Rules
Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.
The X rules: safety, privacy, authenticity, and more
Understand the limitations on the type of content and behavior that we allow, to ensure free and safe conversation.
theintercept.com
And where did Twitter claim that it had no restrictions on what could be posted there? Their TOS is very clear that there are restrictions.
In your campaign to prove me wrong, you apparently did not bother to read the governing rules set forth by Twitter:
The Twitter Rules
Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.
The X rules: safety, privacy, authenticity, and more
Understand the limitations on the type of content and behavior that we allow, to ensure free and safe conversation.
And in the very paragraph you quoted......
"Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely."
They literally contradict your silly claim that they offer unrestricted speech. Laying out some of the restrictions in the very paragraph you quoted. And lay out 15 entire categories of posts that will get you banned with half a hundred specific types of speech that will get you banned.
View attachment 439780
So I ask again, where did Twitter ever say they had no restrictions on speech? As it clearly wasn't on the page you cited, which lists 15 entire categories with dozens of individual example of types of speech that will get you banned.
.... you've got strawman stuffing all over yourself.
Umh, no. I provided an article to support my statement. You disagree, then substantiate your claim. It isn’t my job to do that.
Okay, fine, let's go against the grain:
We’re Not Biased, We’re Liberals: How Cultural Leftism Will Slant Social Media Regulation
In today’s policy climate, mainstream media gets to maintain its biases and proclivities. Will non-conforming social media of the future retain that essential freedom?
OK...but I am not quite seeing how it counters the article I posted (you may not like Politico, but it referenced an outside study) which showed conservative voices by far outnumbered liberals in social media.
So, if conservative voices far outnumber liberals, why is it that the liberal viewpoint is the most commonly accepted view in our society? Hmm?
.... you've got strawman stuffing all over yourself.
Umh, no. I provided an article to support my statement. You disagree, then substantiate your claim. It isn’t my job to do that.
Okay, fine, let's go against the grain:
We’re Not Biased, We’re Liberals: How Cultural Leftism Will Slant Social Media Regulation
In today’s policy climate, mainstream media gets to maintain its biases and proclivities. Will non-conforming social media of the future retain that essential freedom?
OK...but I am not quite seeing how it counters the article I posted (you may not like Politico, but it referenced an outside study) which showed conservative voices by far outnumbered liberals in social media.
So, if conservative voices far outnumber liberals, why is it that the liberal viewpoint is the most commonly accepted view in our society? Hmm?
I am not seeing the correlation. If conservatism is the dominant viewpoint in America, the media and social platforms would indicate just that.
And where did Twitter claim that it had no restrictions on what could be posted there? Their TOS is very clear that there are restrictions.
In your campaign to prove me wrong, you apparently did not bother to read the governing rules set forth by Twitter:
The Twitter Rules
Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.
The X rules: safety, privacy, authenticity, and more
Understand the limitations on the type of content and behavior that we allow, to ensure free and safe conversation.
And in the very paragraph you quoted......
"Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely."
They literally contradict your silly claim that they offer unrestricted speech. Laying out some of the restrictions in the very paragraph you quoted. And lay out 15 entire categories of posts that will get you banned with half a hundred specific types of speech that will get you banned.
View attachment 439780
So I ask again, where did Twitter ever say they had no restrictions on speech? As it clearly wasn't on the page you cited, which lists 15 entire categories with dozens of individual example of types of speech that will get you banned.
.... you've got strawman stuffing all over yourself.
Yes! YES! Cherrypick all you like. The paragraph makes contradictory statements, then, by saying they wish to allow people to freely express themselves, whilst dictating terms on what types of expression are and are not acceptable.
Please.
Gab social media was just banned by Google now too.And shouldn't it be up to our government to declare laws were broken and a platform "evil"?Which begs the question, why did the capital police move the barrier to let them in then open the doors for them..lk
they're banning anything they can't control.
as for insurection and crap on parler - do you really think they'd plan something like that on an open network? get the info, details, users and the like and let the law go after them. getting them out of the store isn't about security, it's about control.
Ya...they did..
'Burn down DC': Violence that erupted at Capitol was incited by pro-Trump mob on social media
Pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol as Congress prepared to formally declare Joe Biden president-elect fomented the violence on social media.www.usatoday.com
Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready.
Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed.
Which begs the question...why were the Capital Police so underprepared?
If you feel there should be no censorship on private platforms, shouldn’t ISIS be allowed to operate there?
You miis those questions.
Yes. That is in my list of questions.
Here is another. Should ISIs be allowed free speech rights on these platforms?
Since when did a "private business" have that power?
A private has the right to create rules (or TOS) for users of its platform and as a private entity it has the right to boot or censor those who break it.
Are you suggesting it doesn’t have that right and must allow every and anything until the Government steps in?
So ISIS should be allowed?
