So.. by this argument, supporters of Nazis have the strongest opinions?
It means platforms' moderation decisions are the strongest opinions, since the only censorship going on in the real world is Republicans' constant attempts to silence that constitutional free speech.
But social media companies should be forced through legislation to provide a reason for removing content, and American citizens ought to be able to challenge it in court.
Protip: That's unconstitutional censorship you're demanding right there, Koby.
On the post: Now It's Harvard Business Review Getting Section 230 Very, Very Wrong
Arguments against Section 230 that don't lie about it:
0
On the post: Bad Faith Politicians Are Using Social Media Suspension To Boost Their Own Profiles
Re: Re: Article by issue
It's always projection from Lodos.
On the post: Shiva Ayyadurai Drops His Potentially Interesting Lawsuit About Massachusetts Officials Complaining To Twitter About Tweets
Alternate headline:
Bad Faith Wannabe Politician Is Using Social Media Suspension To Boost His Own Profile
On the post: Bad Faith Politicians Are Using Social Media Suspension To Boost Their Own Profiles
Re: Article by issue
Put down that meth pipe.
On the post: Bad Faith Politicians Are Using Social Media Suspension To Boost Their Own Profiles
Re: Re: Congrats, you played right into their hands
Said nobody who wasn't deliberately lying.
On the post: Bad Faith Politicians Are Using Social Media Suspension To Boost Their Own Profiles
Re: Re: Re: Stop Defining, Start Announcing
Did you really not see your false equivalence as you were writing that?
On the post: Louisiana & Alabama Attorneys General Set Up Silly Hotline To Report 'Social Media Censorship' They Can't Do Anything About
Re: They don't seem to validate input very much
No need. They way it's set up, every complaint is already 100% bullshit by design.
On the post: Content Moderation At Scale Is Impossible To Do Well: Series About Antisemitism Removed By Instagram For Being Antisemetic
Re: Re: Rules Can Be Illegitimate
It means platforms' moderation decisions are the strongest opinions, since the only censorship going on in the real world is Republicans' constant attempts to silence that constitutional free speech.
On the post: Yes, Actually, The 1st Amendment Does Mean That Twitter Can Kick You Off Its Platform, Wall Street Journal
Re: Re: Re: Mr. Masnick needs to read 1984 again
You only say that because you're illiterate.
On the post: Man Who Sued Apple For Failing To Save Him From Porn Now Suing US Attorney General To Strike Down Section 230
Why is it that every claim/lie Koby/Chozen/Jhon spin about Section 230 ends up being found almost exclusively in crackhead lawsuits like this one?
On the post: Yes, Actually, The 1st Amendment Does Mean That Twitter Can Kick You Off Its Platform, Wall Street Journal
Re: Re: This basement is a sovereign basement
It's projection as always. Blue's the one that loves corporate censorship, especially when it's copyright.
On the post: Social Network GETTR, Which Promised To Support 'Free Speech' Now Full Of Islamic State Jihadi Propaganda
Re: you're just insanely envious...
You're just insane.
On the post: Yes, Actually, The 1st Amendment Does Mean That Twitter Can Kick You Off Its Platform, Wall Street Journal
Re: Re: Solution is...
No amount of spamming will make those hallucinations reality.
On the post: Man Sues Multiple Social Media Services, Claims Banning His Accounts Violates The Civil Rights Act
Re:
[Hallucinates facts not in evodence]
On the post: Yes, Actually, The 1st Amendment Does Mean That Twitter Can Kick You Off Its Platform, Wall Street Journal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No 1st Amendment Right To Censor
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Yes, Actually, The 1st Amendment Does Mean That Twitter Can Kick You Off Its Platform, Wall Street Journal
Re: Re: No 1st Amendment Right To Censor
Well, Koby's the one here who's calling for censorship of opinions he doesn't like, and his arguments are the weakest shit ever, so it checks out.
On the post: Social Network GETTR, Which Promised To Support 'Free Speech' Now Full Of Islamic State Jihadi Propaganda
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's Check The Details
But Koby never cared about free speech when it comes to censoring political opinions he doesn't like like this.
On the post: Social Network GETTR, Which Promised To Support 'Free Speech' Now Full Of Islamic State Jihadi Propaganda
Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's Check The Details
(And unconstitutional compelled speech)
On the post: Social Network GETTR, Which Promised To Support 'Free Speech' Now Full Of Islamic State Jihadi Propaganda
Re: Re: Re: Let's Check The Details
Protip: That's unconstitutional censorship you're demanding right there, Koby.
On the post: Biden's Infrastructure Bill Shouldn't Undermine Cryptocurrency Infrastructure In The Process
... Because that's what anti-Ponzi-scheme laws are for.
Next >>