DeSantis proposes daily fines for Big Tech that deplatform political candidates

Concart said:
Protected from what? That's the point. Those campaigns are being removed because they violate the terms of service, not because they are politicians. Is this really that difficult for you to figure out?
Click to expand...

???....protected from whatever the statute prohibits......for example, removing people for violating the terms of service if they are at the time engaged in a campaign running for political office.....we will have to see what legislation is passed before we can have a definitive answer..........obviously that is difficult for you to figure out, because you are still asking......
 
Concart said:
OMFG are you fucking serious? That's not what protective class means. Jesus you are just beyond stupid. Being in a protected class means you are protected from actions taken SOLELY BECAUSE YOU ARE A PART OF THAT CLASS. You are not immune and cannot be made immune from a private companies terms of service. I tried, but you are just too fucking stupid. Off you go.
Click to expand...

can a black person be protected from the actions of a private company which is violating the Civil Rights Act........can a lesbian be protected from the actions of a private company which is violating the Elliot Larsen Act?.......can a person in a wheelchair be protected from the actions of a private company which is violating the Americans With Disabilities Act?.........yes......and a person running for political office can be protected from the actions of a private company in violation of a statute passed the Florida state legislature......because they would all be members of a class protected by law.......that IS what being a protected member of a class DEFINED BY THAT LAW means.....
 
Concart said:
Overly broad to the point that it's meaningless. 'The election was stolen, go storm the capitol' is not the same as 'I support medicare for all'.
Click to expand...

obviously under your beliefs it would be, if the social media platform decided that saying "I support medicare for all" violated their terms of service......
 
anatta said:
so you let the cat of the bag. they ARE ACTING AS PUBLISHERS -meaning Section 230 doesn't apply.

I heard someone say "the solution to lies isn't banning. it's MORE free speech" -get that?
And this is American values, not censorship,.not banning and culture culture,but more discourse instead.
Click to expand...

The worst form of censorship is when the government comes and tells publishers what they have to publish. And that is exactly what the Republicans are proposing.
 
Walt said:
The worst form of censorship is when the government comes and tells publishers what they have to publish. And that is exactly what the Republicans are proposing.
Click to expand...

Everything looks Orwellian to a talking pig like Anatta.
 
Bull&Terrier said:
btw just checked, she's still running her website and not in jail, how many calls did you make to the fbi on her?
Click to expand...

Only the one reference and it was online, not a call. Their call, however, on what to do about.

Mostly I go by results. The fact her behavior suddenly changed indicates an unknown influence caused the change. Much like the human equivalent of Newton's First and Second Laws of Motion. Sure, I don't know it was the FBI running a microscope up her ass and then feeding her to the IRS, or just a sudden revelation that the Civil War fantasy was crashing. Trump tossing all of them to the wolves means anyone who had relations with those who planned the attack, even if it was just money or advice, was going to go down as a co-conspirator.

Consider this: One asshole shot Lincoln and he choked to death on his own blood three hours after being shot in the neck. Four others hung for the conspiracy. One of them was the first woman the US government ever executed. Thanks Republicans! ;)
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
I forgot all about that. You're right, he did, didn't he? Then he had the police storm her house and seize her laptop.

But there's no fascism to see here, folks.
Click to expand...
First he had the cops raid her house, and point guns at her children. They confiscated all of her devices.

Weeks later, he arrested her. I'm sure she's out on bail.

Ironic though. People should be able to say what they want, as long as it isn't the truth.
 
anatta said:
finally! someone standing up to Big Tech's capricious bannings, without disclosing their process

I love this guy -but then I love anyone standing up for freedom to express political speech
Click to expand...

And you’re going to do WHAT about it? You have no authority to demand that big rech to publish nor post your obviously traitorous demented thoughts.

How will you make them?
 
blackascoal said:
And you’re going to do WHAT about it? You have no authority to demand that big rech to publish nor post your obviously traitorous demented thoughts.

How will you make them?
Click to expand...
Me/ i can't. Congress wont -especially the fascist Dems against free political speech.
They support banning, censorship, and cancel culture. they got the power

I couldn't stop the fucking obscenity of Vietnam either, but it doesn't mean I roll over and flop like a turtle
on it's back.
 
Walt said:
The worst form of censorship is when the government comes and tells publishers what they have to publish. And that is exactly what the Republicans are proposing.
Click to expand...
WTF?
nobody is telling them what TO publish. They are deciding what NOT TO PUBLISH
without ANY transparency and in a capricious manner.

You are standing on your head talking out of your butt
 
anatta said:
Me/ i can't. Congress wont -especially the fascist Dems against free political speech.
They support banning, censorship, and cancel culture. they got the power

I couldn't stop the fucking obscenity of Vietnam either, but it doesn't mean I roll over and flop like a turtle
on it's back.
Click to expand...

Who is telling you to roll over? God, I cannot believe we've got to this point in human history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top