Twitter is now interfering in the 2020 Presidential Election

Poor Richard Saunders said:
Government can't ban people from the public square.
Public officials are the government.
Government officials can't ban people from their accounts because that would be the government banning people from speaking out.

Private companies are not the government. They are free to ban whoever they want. They are especially free to ban people that open them up to lawsuits. Government can't force them to allow posts that would get them sued.
Click to expand...

Actually ISPs and these types of platforms cannot be sued for allowing defamatory statements to be published on their sites. It's hilarious that FreeSpeech wants that changed. If it DID change, pretty much every single cult member would immediately lose their ability to post, and Trump would be kicked off of every single platform. And most likely those platforms would disappear under an avalanche of law suits against the idiots who constantly post defamatory material.
 
anatta said:
I already answered. not running from anything. I gave the remedy as well. "fact checking" is not free from bias either (especially political fact checking with multiple p.o.v's)
Click to expand...

No, you didn't answer. You are a gutless coward. You are afraid to say anything against Dear Leader. That's why you've become a joke, especially to posters who know your past positions.
 
Jerome said:
Do you have someone visit your house every day to help you get dressed?

Just curious.
Click to expand...

He had to make adjustments during the pandemic. Now he has signs in his room that say 'Socks first, then shoes', and 'put the belt THROUGH the loops'.

It helps.
 
anatta said:
^willingly throwing away the right to make unfettered political speech. Your bottom line is worthless.
you are saying a private platform can censor (and making an attachment to a post/Tweet is imposing censorship as well) solely because it's private?

You completely ignore the FUNCTION of social media -it's not to be run to a corps desires
it's to function as a public square for all political speech.

Social media is acting as a political cop and it needs to be regulated otherwise
Click to expand...

You seem to be confused as to what a public space is. The lobby of the Trump hotel is a public space. If we accept your version of public spaces must allow all speech then the Trump hotel lobby could be filled with protestors and it would be illegal for Trump to have them removed. The fact is that if the protestors are removed their free speech rights are not violated because they could do their protest on the street outside.

It is the same thing with Twitter. If Twitter removes someone from their space they are free to go to 4Chan or Reddit and post the same things. If 4Chan and Reddit remove them then they can carry a sign on the street. Their rights have not been limited by the government. They are simply restricted to public spaces. The fact that they can't do it in the most visible private space means nothing until you allow that the Trump hotel can be overrun with protestors and they cannot be removed because it would violate their free speech to do so.
 
Concart said:
Actually ISPs and these types of platforms cannot be sued for allowing defamatory statements to be published on their sites. It's hilarious that FreeSpeech wants that changed. If it DID change, pretty much every single cult member would immediately lose their ability to post, and Trump would be kicked off of every single platform. And most likely those platforms would disappear under an avalanche of law suits against the idiots who constantly post defamatory material.
Click to expand...

FreeSpeech had argued that all those platforms SHOULD be opened up to those kind of lawsuits. I was merely pointing out that such an argument would mean Government could force them to be sued if government could force them to allow all posts.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
FreeSpeech had argued that all those platforms SHOULD be opened up to those kind of lawsuits. I was merely pointing out that such an argument would mean Government could force them to be sued if government could force them to allow all posts.
Click to expand...

Yep, we are on the same page.
 
anatta said:
^willingly throwing away the right to make unfettered political speech. Your bottom line is worthless.
you are saying a private platform can censor (and making an attachment to a post/Tweet is imposing censorship as well) solely because it's private?

You completely ignore the FUNCTION of social media -it's not to be run to a corps desires
it's to function as a public square for all political speech.

Social media is acting as a political cop and it needs to be regulated otherwise
Click to expand...

That's capitalism & the free market. Deal w/ it.

If I start a board & it becomes wildly popular, I'm gonna reserve the right as the board owner to not allow certain content, i.e. blatant racism. That's my right as the owner.

And guess what? It would be the right of the poster to not frequent my board. That's how it works. It's that simple. I don't think you realize that in trying to advocate for free speech, you're advocating AGAINST the rights of business owners.
 
BartenderElite said:
That's capitalism & the free market. Deal w/ it.

If I start a board & it becomes wildly popular, I'm gonna reserve the right as the board owner to not allow certain content, i.e. blatant racism. That's my right as the owner.

And guess what? It would be the right of the poster to not frequent my board. That's how it works. It's that simple. I don't think you realize that in trying to advocate for free speech, you're advocating AGAINST the rights of business owners.
Click to expand...
HA HA. you are arguing for the "rights" of a corporation over those of the people..fascist
 
Concart said:
No, you didn't answer. You are a gutless coward. You are afraid to say anything against Dear Leader. That's why you've become a joke, especially to posters who know your past positions.
Click to expand...
HA HA.
you are focusing on the political moment.
I am focusing on the public square en toto and social media's errant emphasis on fact checking in general.
You are the political hack -not me
 
anatta said:
HA HA.
you are focusing on the political moment.
I am focusing on the public square en toto and social media's errant emphasis on fact checking in general.
You are the political hack -not me
Click to expand...

LOL, maybe you might want to check the title of the thread.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
You seem to be confused as to what a public space is. The lobby of the Trump hotel is a public space. If we accept your version of public spaces must allow all speech then the Trump hotel lobby could be filled with protestors and it would be illegal for Trump to have them removed. The fact is that if the protestors are removed their free speech rights are not violated because they could do their protest on the street outside.

It is the same thing with Twitter. If Twitter removes someone from their space they are free to go to 4Chan or Reddit and post the same things. If 4Chan and Reddit remove them then they can carry a sign on the street. Their rights have not been limited by the government. They are simply restricted to public spaces. The fact that they can't do it in the most visible private space means nothing until you allow that the Trump hotel can be overrun with protestors and they cannot be removed because it would violate their free speech to do so.
Click to expand...
a lobby of a hotel has limited reach of the immediate.
WTF is 4Channel? See i don't even know what that is -but Twitter and FB are worldwide platforms
used by world leaders and Americans ( as well as other populace) it truly is the public square of our times
Political voices need full freedom, and not corporate "corrections" ( which are capable of bias as well of course)

the fact that they can't do it in the most visible private space means nothing
Click to expand...
listen to yourself! you just undermined your own argument that a hotel lobby is the same as "most visible" worldwide medium
 
anatta said:
HA HA. you are arguing for the "rights" of a corporation over those of the people..fascist
Click to expand...

So, you don't know what facism or censorship is. Got it.

You lost this argument early on. It's amazing what you're advocating for - and completely anti-capitalism & anti-America.
 
BartenderElite said:
So, you don't know what facism or censorship is. Got it.
Click to expand...
HA HA I've defined both in detail and in practice as is relevant here

You lost this argument early on. It's amazing what you're advocating for - and completely anti-capitalism & anti-America.
Click to expand...
you are advocating muzzling free speech by corporate over-reach "corrections"
 
anatta said:
HA HA I've defined in detail and in practice


you are advocating muzzling free speech by corporate over-reach "corrections"
Click to expand...

You are advocating, essentially, Socialism. Private enterprises can't control their own practices or content, and leaders should be given special priveleges.

It's all here on this thread. I believe in America & capitalism - I will never agree w/ you on this stance. I'm w/ the founders.
 
BartenderElite said:
You are advocating, essentially, Socialism. Private enterprises can't control their own practices or content, and leaders should be given special priveleges.

It's all here on this thread. I believe in America & capitalism - I will never agree w/ you on this stance. I'm w/ the founders.
Click to expand...
man you simply do not understand regulations is not the same as Socialism.

You advocate everything UN-American.
Private property rights trump free expression of political speech in your fascist world
 
anatta said:
man you simply do not understand regulations is not the same as Socialism.

You advocate everything UN-American.
Private property rights trump free expression of political speech in your fascist world
Click to expand...

LOL - a lot of buzzwords won't help you.

You're all pro- gov't regulation now? This conversation is hilarious. And all because of Trump. Twitter has banned people and controlled their content for years, but this is the first time you're screaming about it.

Love it or leave it, anatta. What you're advocating will never stand in this country of liberty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top