1. #33046
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    None of them do, as far as I know. The only things that Social Media Companies and the like deal with is 'Dangerous Behavior'. If Nancy Pelosi was using her Twitter Account to Urge people to attack police officers, Storm the White House, or similar insanity, then her account would be shut down. If Elizabeth Warren began using her Twitter Account to encourage people not to get vaccines but to drink Bleach or Smoke Twelve Packs of Cigarettes a day to fight COVID, then her account would be shut down.

    Many Republicans still have Social Media Accounts, it's about what they post, not who they are affiliated with.

    This new Texas Law is, well, lame. Yet it could be misused.
    The Democrats are going after Social Media and Tech companies for not cracking down harder on bad actors and misinformation/disinformation/lies and other falsehoods.

    Republicans are going after Social Media and Tech Companies BECAUSE they are cracking down on Bad Actors and misinformation/disinformation/lies and other falsehoods.

    I'd say this speaks volumes.

    If the Texas Law is left in place and is propagated across the country, anyone who has their accounts closed or frozen, anyone who is pushed off site, can claim in court that it was done because the companies are going after Conservatives.

    Their case could be made simply because the Right are the Bad Actors and very few Left get removed from these online sites, so it can begin to look like a bias even if it isn't.
    Last edited by Tami; 09-11-2021 at 12:09 PM.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  2. #33047
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,453

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    So you think QANON conspiratists, Russian Trolls, Anti-Vax alarmist, anti-mask nutjobs, election fraud fanatics and any disseminator of disinformation, hatred or calls to violence should be allowed to spread whatever crap they want on any platform anywhere. With the owners of the platform having no recourse to stop it. Just call whatever garbage you spew as "political" and it stays. Interesting.
    No, I'm saying that if we are seriously about controlling hate speech then we should make the necessary laws against it, not outsource this to private companies whose motives NOBODY should trust. Of course, this will lead to furious pearl clutching by all sides about censorship and violating the sanctity of the 1st Amendment, but those are the kinds of difficult choices you have to make when you actually try to govern effectively, not whatever the hell the Democrats do whenever they're in power. If the fabric of our society is being held together by Twitter's terms of service, then I don't really much have confidence in its viability going forward.

    Now there is the other issue that Facebook and Twitter are global platforms, and allowing the USA to dictate the boundaries of proper speech for billions of people beyond our borders is a bit problematic.
    Last edited by PwrdOn; 09-11-2021 at 12:37 PM.

  3. #33048
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    Why is it that young men deserve less sympathy than women and children? Most of them are there to try and find work so that they can send money home to their families, or earn enough money so that they can get married. This idea that Latin American and Middle Eastern countries are just dumping all of their unwanted dregs on the doorstep of the West is just unbelievably ignorant, Scarface was not a documentary. Why is it that when white men show up uninvited in foreign lands, they get lauded as adventurers and explorers, but when brown people are doing it, they're just a bunch of hoodlums and gangbangers who are here to rape your daughter and get fat off of welfare checks? If one day, a country like Syria or Honduras became powerful enough where they could sail battleships up to your shores and demand that, not only must their people be allowed in, but that they should receive special privileges and extraterritorial rights, would that make it better?
    I didn’t actually say at any point that young men deserve any less sympathy than women and children!

    Similarly none of the rest of your posting actually reflects anything I wrote…”this idea that Latin and Middle Eastern are just dumping…” is just plucked out of nowhere rather than anything I wrote. It may be some ones view. Certainly not mine!

    I think most of the questions you pose later on in your post are rhetorical ones, rather than ones where you are genuinely interested in my answers.

    If I’m wrong on that, by all means ask again, and I’ll answer.
    Last edited by JackDaw; 09-11-2021 at 01:44 PM.

  4. #33049
    Invincible Member Kirby101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,471

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    No, I'm saying that if we are seriously about controlling hate speech then we should make the necessary laws against it, not outsource this to private companies whose motives NOBODY should trust. Of course, this will lead to furious pearl clutching by all sides about censorship and violating the sanctity of the 1st Amendment, but those are the kinds of difficult choices you have to make when you actually try to govern effectively, not whatever the hell the Democrats do whenever they're in power. If the fabric of our society is being held together by Twitter's terms of service, then I don't really much have confidence in its viability going forward.

    Now there is the other issue that Facebook and Twitter are global platforms, and allowing the USA to dictate the boundaries of proper speech for billions of people beyond our borders is a bit problematic.
    But that is censorship and does run up against the First Amendment, whereas the private companies can monitor what content they allow.

    You are on a forum that has very strict rules, would you say the government should dictate this instead?
    There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!

  5. #33050
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    3,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    No, I'm saying that if we are seriously about controlling hate speech then we should make the necessary laws against it, not outsource this to private companies whose motives NOBODY should trust. Of course, this will lead to furious pearl clutching by all sides about censorship and violating the sanctity of the 1st Amendment, but those are the kinds of difficult choices you have to make when you actually try to govern effectively, not whatever the hell the Democrats do whenever they're in power. If the fabric of our society is being held together by Twitter's terms of service, then I don't really much have confidence in its viability going forward.

    Now there is the other issue that Facebook and Twitter are global platforms, and allowing the USA to dictate the boundaries of proper speech for billions of people beyond our borders is a bit problematic.
    It's not like society isn't used to social media rules. The things that get people banned on social media can get people reprimanded/fired if they said them at a regular job.

  6. #33051

    Default

    On this date in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" published profiles of the U.S. House Representative from Texas’ 6th District, Joe Barton, a man most renowned for taking climate change denial to a degree that’s noteworthy even for the modern GOP, claiming that we should not invest in wind turbines because “wind is a finite resource” and that The Great Flood from the Bible was proof against humans having a role in climate change. He’s clearly in the pockets of big oil, and if there was any doubt of that, keep in mind we’re talking about a guy who when the CEO of British Petroleum was called to testify before Congress after the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill… Rep. Barton had the gall to APOLOGIZE TO HIM for the “White House shakedown” of his company, that a sane person would realize was an surprisingly low fine for causing the greatest ecological disaster of our generation. Meanwhile, Barton has also talked openly about abolishing the minimum wage. In March of 2018, Joe Barton may have given any political opponents against him ammunition when he actually attended a town hall, but while a constituent began asking him about various votes he made against legislation that would prevent violence towards women, Barton received jeers from the crowd, and pointed to the man and told him to shut up. The crowd then erupted, and began shouting “You work for us” at him. So, not long after Barton confirmed that he would be running for re-election in 2018, a graphic nude photo of him began circulating online, which he claimed was taken not long after he was separated from his second wife (uh huh… this may have been why they separated). Turns out, Barton is dumb enough to think women on Facebook get turned on by seeing nudes of wrinkled-ass old Congressmen (PRO-TIP: They don’t.) And then, … Joe Barton announced he would retire, after all.)


    Chip Roy

    On this date in 2019, as well as 2020, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” profiled the U.S. House Representative from Texas’ 21st Congressional District, Chip Roy, who was elected to office for the first time in 2018, and whose prior political experience was working as a staffer for the loathsome Sen. Ted Cruz until he saw a plum GOP-leaning seat left behind by retiring Congressman Lamar Smith. And boy oh boy, is Chip Roy showing us that he’s just as much of an ***hole as his former boss.

    In May of 2019, a bill cleared the Senate to approve $19.1 billion in disaster relief funding for victims of wildfires and hurricanes, which included areas of Texas damaged by Hurricane Harvey. On May 24th, 2019, it was expected to pass the House with a simple voice vote, and most of the GOP content to let it pass by a simple voice vote, provided no objections were presented by Republicans. GOP House leadership had no intention of doing so… BUT CHIP ROY is just that much of an ***hole, and he decided to hold up the needed disaster relief bill because Nancy Pelosi thought a voice vote would suffice. Remember, though, this was a bill that got fired through Mitch McConnell’s Senate, and BOTH Texas Senators voted for. But Chip Roy wasn’t gonna let Pelosi get away with… whatever she was doing that all his fellow Texas Republicans wanted.

    That isn’t a one-off for how obsessive Rep. Roy is, as he once kept members of Congress up until 4AM to try and secure money for Trump’s novelty project and all around stupid idea, the border wall… and it wasn’t just that he did that to just be a jerk to Democrats, who obviously have the majority and were gonna shoot that down… but it was that Roy ditched his own wife on their 15th wedding anniversary to do so. What a lucky gal she must be.

    Meanwhile, in House Oversight Committee hearings, Roy has turned up to play defense as much as he can for the Donald Trump and his clusterf*** of an administration, including trying to insinuate during the Michael Cohen hearings that Cohen had only turned on Trump because he was bitter he didn’t get hired to work in the White House.

    He wa far worse during hearings questioning the actions of ICE for locking children in cages, where he claimed to have been to the border many times and never saw a child in a cage (in spite of photos showing this leaking to the public), he went on to say Democrats don’t actually care about the kids and are just attempting to “score political points.

    Motherf***er, this isn’t a game. THOSE ARE CHILDREN IN CAGES. NOBODY IS PLAYIN’ WITH THAT.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

  7. #33052
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    But that is censorship and does run up against the First Amendment, whereas the private companies can monitor what content they allow.

    You are on a forum that has very strict rules, would you say the government should dictate this instead?
    The least rude way that I can think to phrase this?

    This board ain't no "Twitter..."/"Facebook..."

    "Apple..."/"Orange..."

  8. #33053

    Default

    His voting record is, as you’d expect, one of the most rabidly conservative in all of the Republican Caucus:


    Chip Roy is currently making headlines for some brazen sexism. There’s talks of making women eligible to file with selective service so they could be drafted should the U.S. ever have to have one for an armed conflict, and this simple equality has led him to have quite the fit, saying those in DC looking to make women eligible “can go straight to Hell. He also has ceased to have any kind of poker face about partisanship, admitting in a video he posted online that he views his role in Congress is to sow “chaos and an inability to get stuff done, specifically in the hopes of helping Republicans’ cause in the 2022 mid-terms.

    This man is clearly the kind of ***hole who would work for Ted Cruz, all right.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

  9. #33054
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    The least rude way that I can think to phrase this?

    This board ain't no "Twitter..."/"Facebook..."

    "Apple..."/"Orange..."
    As far as the law is concerned, it is the same. Much like Reddit, and other similar sites. Possibly one of the driving forces of the great 2014 Board Wipe.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  10. #33055
    Invincible Member Kirby101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,471

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    The least rude way that I can think to phrase this?

    This board ain't no "Twitter..."/"Facebook..."

    "Apple..."/"Orange..."
    No, because more people use FB. A newspaper can choose what articles or letters to print, whether it's the NY Times or the local paper in a small town
    Why can't FB police it's platform?
    No on has a right to use Twitter.

    You aren't rude, you are just wrong.
    Last edited by Kirby101; 09-11-2021 at 02:10 PM.
    There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!

  11. #33056
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,453

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    I didn’t actually say at any point that young men deserve any less sympathy than women and children!

    Similarly none of the rest of your posting actually reflects anything I wrote…”this idea that Latin and Middle Eastern are just dumping…” is just plucked out of nowhere rather than anything I wrote. It may be some ones view. Certainly not mine!

    I think most of the questions you pose later on in your post are rhetorical ones, rather than ones where you are genuinely interested in my answers.

    If I’m wrong on that, by all means ask again, and I’ll answer.
    Well whenever it's trotted out that most migrants are young men, usually the implication is that they aren't really at as much risk as women or children and thus can more justifiably be turned away or sent back. If that's not what you intended, I would like to hear what it was you meant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    But that is censorship and does run up against the First Amendment, whereas the private companies can monitor what content they allow.

    You are on a forum that has very strict rules, would you say the government should dictate this instead?
    Yes but see this is exactly an example of how our governing principles don't fit the reality of the society we're living in, and instead of really addressing the root cause of the problem we just punt it to the private sector. And make no mistake, it is an objectively worse outcome that content on what are functionally public forums is now being regulated by private companies, whose rules exist to serve the interests of the company, rather than the public.

    Quote Originally Posted by shooshoomanjoe View Post
    It's not like society isn't used to social media rules. The things that get people banned on social media can get people reprimanded/fired if they said them at a regular job.
    Yes but these rules are totally arbitrary, what will get you fired at one workplace might be ignored or even applauded somewhere else, leaving it up to the free market to decide how much racism we're willing to accept is a recipe for disaster.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    No, because more people use FB. A newspaper can choose what articles or letters to print, whether it's the NY Times or the local paper in a small town
    Why can't FB police it's platform?
    No on has a right to use Twitter.

    You aren't rude, you are just wrong.
    Facebook and Twitter, just by virtue of their sheer size, simply cannot be treated the same as a local newspaper or comic book forum, and are very much public spaces that have vastly outgrown what their creators intended them to be. And as evidenced by their horrific handling of personal data privacy issues, big tech simply cannot be trusted to act in an ethical or socially responsible manner, and while they might not currently be abusing their rules to push a political agenda, I certainly wouldn't put it past them to do just that. Indeed, fiduciary duty demands that private companies prioritize their own interests over the public good, and these platforms are indeed obligated to set arbitrary and self-serving rules. And because of their massive userbase, it isn't really feasible for someone to simply migrate to another platform, because no viable alternatives to Facebook or Twitter exist. And because social media has become an indispensable aspect of life in the 21st century, access to these platforms has become as fundamental a human right as access to transportation, electricity, the internet, or all of the other things that were considered luxuries at one point but now are indisputably necessities.
    Last edited by PwrdOn; 09-11-2021 at 02:48 PM.

  12. #33057
    Ultimate Member babyblob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    New Richmond Ohio
    Posts
    12,253

    Default

    I have no real issue with the Private companies like Twitter and Facebook policing themselves rather then Leaving it up to the Government to pass some Hate Speech crime law.

    Can you imagine if Congress decides to pass a law banning and making hate speech illegal? How long would that go? You have the Dems say what they think is hate speech, then the QOP will debate what they think is hate speech. They will go back and forth for a few months trying to decide what is hate speech is and what the meaning of hate speech is. before at last it gets dropped and never comes up again.

    So yes I think it is best to leave it to the private sector. They need to sit down and make a clear determination of what speech they will allow on their platform. of course as CEO's or other management change this may change.

    To be honest there is no real easy answer. And no one here can really come up with one.
    This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.

  13. #33058
    Invincible Member Kirby101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,471

    Default

    FB a right? That is one long, unreal step.
    There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!

  14. #33059
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,453

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    FB a right? That is one long, unreal step.
    Do you believe that internet access is a fundamental human right? Because in many countries, Facebook basically IS the internet, since if you were relatively late to the internet party it doesn't really make sense to create separate websites for most services when you can just do everything through social media, and if you aren't able to access Facebook you are locked out of A LOT.

  15. #33060
    Ultimate Member babyblob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    New Richmond Ohio
    Posts
    12,253

    Default

    And no Social Media is not a human right. No one has a right to Twitter, Snapchat, or Instagram. Those are luxuries and rather silly ones at that.

    The Internet yes, job sites, new sites yes. Social Media? No. The internet and Social Media are not the same.

    I can do all I need to do with my Mental health scheduling, shopping, Doctors, Social Security, etc... All without going on to Facebook or Twitter.
    Last edited by babyblob; 09-11-2021 at 03:19 PM.
    This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •