CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 148,629
- 71,937
- 2,330
We had Parlor, but Bezos illegally shut it downYou poor little conservatives are so mistreated.
If only one of you had the balls and the skill to make your own platform....
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We had Parlor, but Bezos illegally shut it downYou poor little conservatives are so mistreated.
If only one of you had the balls and the skill to make your own platform....
We had Parlor, but Bezos illegally shut it down
It's really not. Twitter and other social media platforms are built over many years learning and evolving. They are much harder to replicate than people think. I've used Parler. It's missing so many features, it's so hard to use, it's such a bad platform.building the platform is easy.
No, there is no monopoly on the internet. The internet is about as free and open as it gets. Everyone has access. Everyone can get online. Everyone can use your website. The means by which the "big boys" can keep you down is extremely limited to downright nonexistent.trying to do it with the current big boys keeping you down and out, that's a different story. big tech has a monopoly and isn't about to let it go. quite the opposite as they're working to become default law now and replace our current legal system with what they want to do.
while you giggle and guffaw, google and apple kicked them out of the store and amazon said they were breaking laws and kicked them off of their web services as they were "accused" of being the launching ground for the "insurrection".You still have Parlor. What did Bezos do that was illegal? Has he been charged yet?
while you giggle and guffaw, google and apple kicked them out of the store and amazon said they were breaking laws and kicked them off of their web services as they were "accused" of being the launching ground for the "insurrection".
now - since when do companies such as this get to determine laws and who is guilty or not? they sure exacted a punishment for activities that were rumored to be there but it was found that the vast majority of people used FB to plan this "insurrection", yet FB never was mentioned.
this goes back to them being a monopoly and able to help keep options down and out that you giggled at but didn't address.
I thought he would not allow Parlor to use his routers...or something.You still have Parlor. What did Bezos do that was illegal? Has he been charged yet?
You mean like a Christian baker can refuse to bake a cake?????Private companies are allowed to decide who uses their service/products/space. There is no "right" to be in a specific store or specific web server. No different than WalMart choosing not to carry a specific item
I thought he would not allow Parlor to use his routers...or something.
You mean like a Christian baker can refuse to bake a cake?????
An angel just got their wingsYes, I think a Christian baker can refuse to bake a cake, 100%.
when you provide a service, you can't arbitrarily decide who can use it or not, esp kick them off for breaking laws they didn't break. this in effect allows a private company to determine who is and who isn't breaking the law.Private companies are allowed to decide who uses their service/products/space. There is no "right" to be in a specific store or specific web server. No different than WalMart choosing not to carry a specific item
when you provide a service, you can't arbitrarily decide who can use it or not, esp kick them off for breaking laws they didn't break. this in effect allows a private company to determine who is and who isn't breaking the law.
care to swing again or just laugh at me and go away like you did when i asked you to prove facebook wasn't a publisher and you kept to "new info only" which really has nothing to do with it.
so, to be clear you don't know what he did, but it's not illegal.I think he did do something like that, but doing so is not illegal
and if those forbidden reasons are held to 1 side only, you are in effect stopping your competition. a monopoly does this and is usually held accountable. but these days it's war and people simply don't seem to give a fuck.Sure you can, as long as you do not do it for one of the "forbidden" reasons. I do not even agree with the forbidden reasons, but they are there and if you do not do it for one of those, then the company is not doing anything wrong nor illegal.
Facebook is not a publisher, a publisher pre-approves all things published by them. FB does not do this. Thus they are not a publisher.
Not sure why this is so confusing for so many of you.
in effect, a private company can bypass courts and laws and determine which businesses can stay or go based on heresay evidence or their own motivations.
facebook is a publisher when it suits their purposes and when they validate what is true or not, that crosses the line. your very weak "new info only" doesn't cut it. publishers can publish a bible if they want and that's a pretty old book, but they'd still be the publisher. i've asked several times for more details and you simply poof.
i don't know why that is so confusing for you.
Private companies are allowed to decide who uses their service/products/space. There is no "right" to be in a specific store or specific web server. No different than WalMart choosing not to carry a specific item
Yet you abandon that principle when it comes to bakeries (for example) or any other private business that doesn't want anything to do with people like you.
Yet you abandon that principle when it comes to bakeries (for example) or any other private business that doesn't want anything to do with people like you.
yes you did which was the entire point of my rebuttle you eventually ran away from.I have not ever said anything about "new info only", I said everything they publish is pre-approved ahead of time. Why do you think "pre-approval" is the same as "new info only"?
Even with your bible example, the company publishing the bible preapproves it prior to it being published.
This is what makes them a publisher. Once FB starts to pre-approve every singled post before anyone can see it, then they will be a publisher.
Only one of us is confused, and it is not me.