Court blocks equality law.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Are you indicating here that you prefer the lies and misinformation spread by republicans, china, and russia? Do you want twitter to become literal fake news?

Nah, twitter gets the choice to cull problematic users.

Just like you can't scream "FIRE" in a crowded theater, you can't scream "IVERMECTIN CURES COVID" on twitter.

Gtfo of here.

Haha jesus christ, okay adolf whatever you say. I can tell how persuadable you are.

NEIN!!! DASSS IVERMECTEINZ, EIS JUDENREIN!!

(alternative: treat adults as adults, capable of parsing information and determining if it is in fact true, all on their very own! I mean, "women can't have cocks" is a controversial position they *ALSO* consider "dangerous misinformation" btw)

(oh and also nobody was saying ivermectin "cures" covid, if you could be bothered to actually look into it. It is showing promise for certain patients to lessen the severity of certain symptoms, that's all. I agree with you that people claiming it's some miracle drug are kooks, but that doesn't mean there isn't legitimate science being conducted into it's efficacy. Should we not consider every possible option that might help? Why oppose this drug? It's so politically motivated and retarded.)

[Homesteaded]

Ivermectin has been dosed in the billions. One of the safest drugs we have. Shut the fuck up

[walfreyydo]

Saying a private company cannot limit the content on their own platform is like saying a private business, lets say a bakery must make a wedding cake for a gay couple.

See what I did there?


You trump people need to learn consistency in your arguments, the hypocrisy is laughable.

[Jibartik]

Democrats are the ones that are upset about social media not trump people.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by walfreyydo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Saying a private company cannot limit the content on their own platform is like saying a private business, lets say a bakery must make a wedding cake for a gay couple.

See what I did there?


You trump people need to learn consistency in your arguments, the hypocrisy is laughable.

No the weakness of this argument is laughable. The two things are completely different. The baking or not baking of wedding cakes does not swing the elections of the US. The ways future history plays out are not determined by the whims and political biases of the cake baker. The context and circumstances are totally different.

And spare me the hypocrisy charge lol

The left wants the private bakery to be forced to bake the wedding cake
The left also doesn't want twitter to be forced to host conservatives, because private business

Gotta pick one.

[Jibartik]

OK since both of you want to nationalize social media, and so does Zuckerberg. What is stopping it?

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No the weakness of this argument is laughable. The two things are completely different....
...
The left wants the private bakery to be forced to bake the wedding cake
The left also doesn't want twitter to be forced to host conservatives, because private business

Gotta pick one.

It really looks like you have the laughable argument.

1. The conversations isn't that twitter should be forced to host conservatives. The discussion is on free speech. And twitter can ban you for your tweets if they deemed extreme or dangerous misinformation. Something conservative just happen to be guilty on the platform of.

2. Twitter and Facebook are havens for the conservatives.

3. Twitter the private business has guidelines and if you break them you are banned. It is as simple as that.

Your analogy is was just flawed.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

OK since both of you want to nationalize social media, and so does Zuckerberg. What is stopping it?

I'm not sure what you mean by "nationalizing social media"?

Private businesses used to be able to deny black people from patronizing them, but then the civil rights act of 1964 made that illegal.

Was that nationalizing those businesses.. or... ?

Also, nobody is saying that twitter shouldn't be able to ban conservatives. The argument is that they need to apply their standards equally, and in good faith, to be protected by sec.230, which they blatantly don't. They do this via incredibly vague, nebulous and maleable verbiage like "hatespeech". Hatespeech is not allowed! Okay, well, I consider it to be "hatespeech" when people make jokes about conservatives being white supremacists, because that's complete slander. Will twitter ban those people for "hatespeech"? I have a feeling.... not so much.

[Homesteaded]

The cake baking fiasco is so misunderstood...the issue was that the couple wanted them to decorate it in a way that made it known that it was for a gay couple. The Bakery would happily sell a cake to the couple. They would not sell and decorate a wedding cake for a gay couple.

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not sure what you mean by "nationalizing social media"?

Making it so social media answered to a national review of any type.

The current pitch, all 3 sides are proposing, is to strike down that law that prevents social media companies from being liable for things users post, i forget the exact dealio number and law name, Whale remembers I'm sure?

The social media companies convinced america that it would be bad to do that back in the late 90s or 2000s, and we all agreed and so they made that a law.

But now they all changed their minds, the media companies too, mostly because they now have empires large enough to be able to pay for the review boards, while competition would not, so it puts them at a great advantage to maintain control of the "airwaves" so to speak.

So yeah that's the current status of social media laws in this country and where they're headed, because there is not one group that argues against changing the law.

edit: Oh yeah should metion media companies like CNN and FOX also want this to happen because they are losing control of the airwaves to social media and user created content on youtube.