Nunes sues Twitter, some users, seeks over $250M alleging anti-conservative 'shadow bans,' smears

[playtime]

Because Trump never divested from his business interests, he violates the Constitution every time the Trump Organization has business dealings with foreign or American government officials.

Do us a favor sparky. Don’t ever mention the U.S. Constitution. You’re too ignorant of the document - that you have never read - to mention it. That’s an insult.

Hitlery Clinton violated the Emoluments Clause. President Trump hasn’t come even remotely close to violating it. You’re a ****’n moron. Truly. He is not required to “divest” in any capacity. That’s not what the Emoluments Clause is about, you dumb dillhole.

the case in going thru the courts now.

 

[iceberg]

win or lose doesn't really matter in this one.

it just has to be very expensive for the media that chooses to be 100% biased and/or pull stories out of their ass. given the nature of some of these stories and the legal mess that will have to be gone through, this is a very expensive juncture of our media today. we'll see if they calm or double down.

Why should it be expensive for Twitter to be biased?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

it really doesn't matter what i or anyone else thinks on this. they are going to court many times over at this point and it *IS* going to get very expensive.

not going to get into the wordsmithing game today. sorry.

Why do you support such things?

It is going to get expensive because he have a president and elected officials that are butthurt and will use the power of the government as their preparation H...and you are good with that.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

in this instance i equate this to saying FIRE in a public theater. our freedoms only go so far.

and dude, i worked at Microsoft as Janet Reno and the dems decided they got big enough to tell what to do and force their activities as well. so let's not wave your angry dick at the (R)s and cry foul. this is standard operating procedure that comes out of human nature. you're seeing this from a singular perspective and hunting for words you can throw back and go THAT'S BULLSHIT at the poster.

your MO, i get that. but annoying as **** sometimes.

Well, first off my dick is never angry.

Second, the Repubs claim to be the party of small government and more freedoms.

Also, they are the ones in power doing this now. I was just as upset with that Dems and Reno.

We freely and happily give up way too many of our rights

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i imagine we've all had an angry dick at times.

ANYWAY -

the dems claim to be the party for the poor. the left claims to care about freedom of speech. no one is who they ought to be anymore so to single people out and go GRRRR comes across as an angry dick being waved around. while yes the (R)s are the ones doing it now they are doing it because a class of people are being silenced in our "open" media. MS was just companies getting pissed they couldn't out-do MS so they went the legal route. these are direct consumer related complaints. in all my time at MS i don't recall too many consumers being mad that the OS included things like paint, wordpad, IE, mail and a way to play music. but all this had to be removed so the consumer would choose what they wanted OF WHICH they could do anyway. only the lazy didn't go look.

in the end i don't disagree that the gov needs to stay out. but for things like the catholic kids and the renegade indian, that isn't the gov suing them now is it? a vast majority of lawsuits are coming yes from the right but really our government saying WE'RE GOING TO COURT!!!

it's the people being silenced doing that. if it's twitters right to shadow ban them (and it is i suppose) then it's their right to take it to court and find out what rights if any are being violated now isn't it? whether you and i agree with their moves or not doesn't matter.

it's about to get very expensive for facebook, google, twitter and even MS as they try to checkmark "news" for people. "the people" obviously don't want that and this is their return fire.

 

[Crepitus]

Can't go anywhere, Twitter is a private company and can refuse service to whomever they please.

Hahahahaha! This from the asshole who claims that people don’t have the right to refuse gay couples.

Oh, so you are ready to start baking those gay wedding cakes!

 

[dudmuck]

Because Trump never divested from his business interests, he violates the Constitution every time the Trump Organization has business dealings with foreign or American government officials.

Do us a favor sparky. Don’t ever mention the U.S. Constitution. You’re too ignorant of the document - that you have never read - to mention it. That’s an insult.

Hitlery Clinton violated the Emoluments Clause. President Trump hasn’t come even remotely close to violating it. You’re a ****’n moron. Truly. He is not required to “divest” in any capacity. That’s not what the Emoluments Clause is about, you dumb dillhole.

Clinton Foundation still exists, but Trump's foundation was forced to dissolve. The president taking foreign money directly into his business.

You're only addressing 1 out of 10 issues.

 

[iceberg]

Can't go anywhere, Twitter is a private company and can refuse service to whomever they please.

Hahahahaha! This from the asshole who claims that people don’t have the right to refuse gay couples.

Oh, so you are ready to start baking those gay wedding cakes!

or make this dresses for ivanka. funny how the left NOT doing something was valid when it was their inner-emo getting butthurt.

 

[iceberg]

Because Trump never divested from his business interests, he violates the Constitution every time the Trump Organization has business dealings with foreign or American government officials.

Do us a favor sparky. Don’t ever mention the U.S. Constitution. You’re too ignorant of the document - that you have never read - to mention it. That’s an insult.

Hitlery Clinton violated the Emoluments Clause. President Trump hasn’t come even remotely close to violating it. You’re a ****’n moron. Truly. He is not required to “divest” in any capacity. That’s not what the Emoluments Clause is about, you dumb dillhole.

Clinton Foundation still exists, but Trump's foundation was forced to dissolve. The president taking foreign money directly into his business.

You're only addressing 1 out of 10 issues.

your avatar makes you look the fool.

i see the likeness.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why should it be expensive for Twitter to be biased?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

it really doesn't matter what i or anyone else thinks on this. they are going to court many times over at this point and it *IS* going to get very expensive.

not going to get into the wordsmithing game today. sorry.

Why do you support such things?

It is going to get expensive because he have a president and elected officials that are butthurt and will use the power of the government as their preparation H...and you are good with that.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

in this instance i equate this to saying FIRE in a public theater. our freedoms only go so far.

and dude, i worked at Microsoft as Janet Reno and the dems decided they got big enough to tell what to do and force their activities as well. so let's not wave your angry dick at the (R)s and cry foul. this is standard operating procedure that comes out of human nature. you're seeing this from a singular perspective and hunting for words you can throw back and go THAT'S BULLSHIT at the poster.

your MO, i get that. but annoying as **** sometimes.

Well, first off my dick is never angry.

Second, the Repubs claim to be the party of small government and more freedoms.

Also, they are the ones in power doing this now. I was just as upset with that Dems and Reno.

We freely and happily give up way too many of our rights

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i imagine we've all had an angry dick at times.

ANYWAY -

the dems claim to be the party for the poor. the left claims to care about freedom of speech. no one is who they ought to be anymore so to single people out and go GRRRR comes across as an angry dick being waved around. while yes the (R)s are the ones doing it now they are doing it because a class of people are being silenced in our "open" media. MS was just companies getting pissed they couldn't out-do MS so they went the legal route. these are direct consumer related complaints. in all my time at MS i don't recall too many consumers being mad that the OS included things like paint, wordpad, IE, mail and a way to play music. but all this had to be removed so the consumer would choose what they wanted OF WHICH they could do anyway. only the lazy didn't go look.

in the end i don't disagree that the gov needs to stay out. but for things like the catholic kids and the renegade indian, that isn't the gov suing them now is it? a vast majority of lawsuits are coming yes from the right but really our government saying WE'RE GOING TO COURT!!!

it's the people being silenced doing that. if it's twitters right to shadow ban them (and it is i suppose) then it's their right to take it to court and find out what rights if any are being violated now isn't it? whether you and i agree with their moves or not doesn't matter.

it's about to get very expensive for facebook, google, twitter and even MS as they try to checkmark "news" for people. "the people" obviously don't want that and this is their return fire.

How long till they move to sites like this one?

The once “free” speech of the Internet is being given back one piece at a time and far too many people are happy about doing so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[iceberg]

it really doesn't matter what i or anyone else thinks on this. they are going to court many times over at this point and it *IS* going to get very expensive.

not going to get into the wordsmithing game today. sorry.

Why do you support such things?

It is going to get expensive because he have a president and elected officials that are butthurt and will use the power of the government as their preparation H...and you are good with that.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

in this instance i equate this to saying FIRE in a public theater. our freedoms only go so far.

and dude, i worked at Microsoft as Janet Reno and the dems decided they got big enough to tell what to do and force their activities as well. so let's not wave your angry dick at the (R)s and cry foul. this is standard operating procedure that comes out of human nature. you're seeing this from a singular perspective and hunting for words you can throw back and go THAT'S BULLSHIT at the poster.

your MO, i get that. but annoying as **** sometimes.

Well, first off my dick is never angry.

Second, the Repubs claim to be the party of small government and more freedoms.

Also, they are the ones in power doing this now. I was just as upset with that Dems and Reno.

We freely and happily give up way too many of our rights

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i imagine we've all had an angry dick at times.

ANYWAY -

the dems claim to be the party for the poor. the left claims to care about freedom of speech. no one is who they ought to be anymore so to single people out and go GRRRR comes across as an angry dick being waved around. while yes the (R)s are the ones doing it now they are doing it because a class of people are being silenced in our "open" media. MS was just companies getting pissed they couldn't out-do MS so they went the legal route. these are direct consumer related complaints. in all my time at MS i don't recall too many consumers being mad that the OS included things like paint, wordpad, IE, mail and a way to play music. but all this had to be removed so the consumer would choose what they wanted OF WHICH they could do anyway. only the lazy didn't go look.

in the end i don't disagree that the gov needs to stay out. but for things like the catholic kids and the renegade indian, that isn't the gov suing them now is it? a vast majority of lawsuits are coming yes from the right but really our government saying WE'RE GOING TO COURT!!!

it's the people being silenced doing that. if it's twitters right to shadow ban them (and it is i suppose) then it's their right to take it to court and find out what rights if any are being violated now isn't it? whether you and i agree with their moves or not doesn't matter.

it's about to get very expensive for facebook, google, twitter and even MS as they try to checkmark "news" for people. "the people" obviously don't want that and this is their return fire.

How long till they move to sites like this one?

The once “free” speech of the Internet is being given back one piece at a time and far too many people are happy about doing so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

good question. social sites centralize communication but twitter is nothing but an RSS feed on 'roids. technically it is not at all spectacular. but moving to these sites did prompt people to abandon sites like this because there simply wasn't enough traffic. this site succeeds for a variety of reasons, some i appreciate, some i wish would stop (people anyway) but i can ignore 'em and to shut them up cause i don't like 'em well, that means i could be shut up also, huh?

kinda the problem on twitter, facebook and many social sites. one mindset *is* telling the other to shut up and people say "free service" so they roll with it. HOWEVER, if using my privacy and surfing habits to make money, well it's not "free" anymore, is it? i am in some form paying for the service. now if i'm paying for it, the rules change.

this is what the big boys get to figure out. agree/disagree like/love/hate - doesn't matter. it's happening and it's going to come full force into their face like a nuclear boomerang. and it will be very expensive. in the end the gov WILL tell them how to operate and this idea of "run their business their way" is going to fade. it happens as a normal life cycle and it's happening again. you saw reno/ms, this is a repeat.

circle of life.

it's not right, left, dem, repub or the like. it's people. now will people come back to forums like these? likely not. those who want to visit them already do. some may look for smaller more meaningful conversations but most are likely just burnt out on a lot of this.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why do you support such things?

It is going to get expensive because he have a president and elected officials that are butthurt and will use the power of the government as their preparation H...and you are good with that.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

in this instance i equate this to saying FIRE in a public theater. our freedoms only go so far.

and dude, i worked at Microsoft as Janet Reno and the dems decided they got big enough to tell what to do and force their activities as well. so let's not wave your angry dick at the (R)s and cry foul. this is standard operating procedure that comes out of human nature. you're seeing this from a singular perspective and hunting for words you can throw back and go THAT'S BULLSHIT at the poster.

your MO, i get that. but annoying as **** sometimes.

Well, first off my dick is never angry.

Second, the Repubs claim to be the party of small government and more freedoms.

Also, they are the ones in power doing this now. I was just as upset with that Dems and Reno.

We freely and happily give up way too many of our rights

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i imagine we've all had an angry dick at times.

ANYWAY -

the dems claim to be the party for the poor. the left claims to care about freedom of speech. no one is who they ought to be anymore so to single people out and go GRRRR comes across as an angry dick being waved around. while yes the (R)s are the ones doing it now they are doing it because a class of people are being silenced in our "open" media. MS was just companies getting pissed they couldn't out-do MS so they went the legal route. these are direct consumer related complaints. in all my time at MS i don't recall too many consumers being mad that the OS included things like paint, wordpad, IE, mail and a way to play music. but all this had to be removed so the consumer would choose what they wanted OF WHICH they could do anyway. only the lazy didn't go look.

in the end i don't disagree that the gov needs to stay out. but for things like the catholic kids and the renegade indian, that isn't the gov suing them now is it? a vast majority of lawsuits are coming yes from the right but really our government saying WE'RE GOING TO COURT!!!

it's the people being silenced doing that. if it's twitters right to shadow ban them (and it is i suppose) then it's their right to take it to court and find out what rights if any are being violated now isn't it? whether you and i agree with their moves or not doesn't matter.

it's about to get very expensive for facebook, google, twitter and even MS as they try to checkmark "news" for people. "the people" obviously don't want that and this is their return fire.

How long till they move to sites like this one?

The once “free” speech of the Internet is being given back one piece at a time and far too many people are happy about doing so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

good question. social sites centralize communication but twitter is nothing but an RSS feed on 'roids. technically it is not at all spectacular. but moving to these sites did prompt people to abandon sites like this because there simply wasn't enough traffic. this site succeeds for a variety of reasons, some i appreciate, some i wish would stop (people anyway) but i can ignore 'em and to shut them up cause i don't like 'em well, that means i could be shut up also, huh?

kinda the problem on twitter, facebook and many social sites. one mindset *is* telling the other to shut up and people say "free service" so they roll with it. HOWEVER, if using my privacy and surfing habits to make money, well it's not "free" anymore, is it? i am in some form paying for the service. now if i'm paying for it, the rules change.

this is what the big boys get to figure out. agree/disagree like/love/hate - doesn't matter. it's happening and it's going to come full force into their face like a nuclear boomerang. and it will be very expensive. in the end the gov WILL tell them how to operate and this idea of "run their business their way" is going to fade. it happens as a normal life cycle and it's happening again. you saw reno/ms, this is a repeat.

circle of life.

it's not right, left, dem, repub or the like. it's people. now will people come back to forums like these? likely not. those who want to visit them already do. some may look for smaller more meaningful conversations but most are likely just burnt out on a lot of this.

I am not talking about people moving to sites like this, I am talking about sites like this being the next target for law suits and attacks.

Can I sue this site for banning me for a week for something I see people do 100 times a day without repercussions?

Should I be able to sue another website that soft banned me for calling Trump a misogynist jerk?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[iceberg]

in this instance i equate this to saying FIRE in a public theater. our freedoms only go so far.

and dude, i worked at Microsoft as Janet Reno and the dems decided they got big enough to tell what to do and force their activities as well. so let's not wave your angry dick at the (R)s and cry foul. this is standard operating procedure that comes out of human nature. you're seeing this from a singular perspective and hunting for words you can throw back and go THAT'S BULLSHIT at the poster.

your MO, i get that. but annoying as **** sometimes.

Well, first off my dick is never angry.

Second, the Repubs claim to be the party of small government and more freedoms.

Also, they are the ones in power doing this now. I was just as upset with that Dems and Reno.

We freely and happily give up way too many of our rights

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i imagine we've all had an angry dick at times.

ANYWAY -

the dems claim to be the party for the poor. the left claims to care about freedom of speech. no one is who they ought to be anymore so to single people out and go GRRRR comes across as an angry dick being waved around. while yes the (R)s are the ones doing it now they are doing it because a class of people are being silenced in our "open" media. MS was just companies getting pissed they couldn't out-do MS so they went the legal route. these are direct consumer related complaints. in all my time at MS i don't recall too many consumers being mad that the OS included things like paint, wordpad, IE, mail and a way to play music. but all this had to be removed so the consumer would choose what they wanted OF WHICH they could do anyway. only the lazy didn't go look.

in the end i don't disagree that the gov needs to stay out. but for things like the catholic kids and the renegade indian, that isn't the gov suing them now is it? a vast majority of lawsuits are coming yes from the right but really our government saying WE'RE GOING TO COURT!!!

it's the people being silenced doing that. if it's twitters right to shadow ban them (and it is i suppose) then it's their right to take it to court and find out what rights if any are being violated now isn't it? whether you and i agree with their moves or not doesn't matter.

it's about to get very expensive for facebook, google, twitter and even MS as they try to checkmark "news" for people. "the people" obviously don't want that and this is their return fire.

How long till they move to sites like this one?

The once “free” speech of the Internet is being given back one piece at a time and far too many people are happy about doing so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

good question. social sites centralize communication but twitter is nothing but an RSS feed on 'roids. technically it is not at all spectacular. but moving to these sites did prompt people to abandon sites like this because there simply wasn't enough traffic. this site succeeds for a variety of reasons, some i appreciate, some i wish would stop (people anyway) but i can ignore 'em and to shut them up cause i don't like 'em well, that means i could be shut up also, huh?

kinda the problem on twitter, facebook and many social sites. one mindset *is* telling the other to shut up and people say "free service" so they roll with it. HOWEVER, if using my privacy and surfing habits to make money, well it's not "free" anymore, is it? i am in some form paying for the service. now if i'm paying for it, the rules change.

this is what the big boys get to figure out. agree/disagree like/love/hate - doesn't matter. it's happening and it's going to come full force into their face like a nuclear boomerang. and it will be very expensive. in the end the gov WILL tell them how to operate and this idea of "run their business their way" is going to fade. it happens as a normal life cycle and it's happening again. you saw reno/ms, this is a repeat.

circle of life.

it's not right, left, dem, repub or the like. it's people. now will people come back to forums like these? likely not. those who want to visit them already do. some may look for smaller more meaningful conversations but most are likely just burnt out on a lot of this.

I am not talking about people moving to sites like this, I am talking about sites like this being the next target for law suits and attacks.

Can I sue this site for banning me for a week for something I see people do 100 times a day without repercussions?

Should I be able to sue another website that soft banned me for calling Trump a misogynist jerk?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

maybe. but isn't it someones "right" to sue? sooner or later we just go past that being a viable option. my point is there comes a time you crossover from one phase to the next. while someone could try to sue me in here they won't get far and even if they did, what would they get vs. the cost to get it? not much, quite a bit, don't do it. facebook/twitter and so forth have much deeper pockets. right or wrong, the lawsuits are coming. also, when the news is intentionally shading one mindset for another, when are they held accountable or is that ok also? we have a government and judicial system and hell, a religion so we can at least run under the pretense of ultimate justice for the wrongs we've endured in life. when one extreme gets too loud, the other extreme takes it down. nature of the beast.

also - just because you don't see a mod "do something" doesn't mean they didn't. they don't need to make every move public and i don't need to see them apply their rules to me to all just so i feel better about being here. when i get my occasional "cut it out" it's because of something i did. while i see others who do the same (and a lot worse) i have zero idea what if anything the mods have done to them as well.

why should i know? i'll worry about myself and move on. if it gets to the point where i don't like it here, i'll leave. but not many run under that mindset and many have an "entitled" sense about them.

should you be able to sue a site for something like that? well you can try. chance winning and your cost involved will keep that from happening.

that really doesn't apply to the big boys - like it or not.

 

[Dick Foster]

And it begins. I predict this will be just the first of a flood of lawsuits against these internet media companies. They brought it on themselves.

Nunes sues Twitter, some users, seeks over $250M alleging anti-conservative 'shadow bans,' smears​

California GOP Rep. Devin Nunes filed a major lawsuit seeking $250 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages against Twitter and a handful of its users on Monday, accusing the social media site of "shadow-banning conservatives" including himself to influence the 2018 elections, systematically censoring opposing viewpoints and totally "ignoring" lawful complaints of repeated abusive behavior.

In a complaint filed in Virginia state court on Monday, obtained by Fox News, Nunes said Twitter was guilty of "knowingly hosting and monetizing content that is clearly abusive, hateful and defamatory – providing both a voice and financial incentive to the defamers – thereby facilitating defamation on its platform."

Although federal law ordinarily exempts services like Twitter from defamation liability, Nunes' suit said the platform has taken such an active role in curating and banning content that it should face liability like any other organization that defames.

"Twitter created and developed the content at issue in this case by transforming false accusations of criminal conduct, imputed wrongdoing, dishonesty and lack of integrity into a publicly available commodity used by unscrupulous political operatives and their donor/clients as a weapon," Nunes' legal team wrote. "Twitter is 'responsible' for the development of offensive content on its platform because it in some way specifically encourages development of what is offensive about the content." ​

Bend over and grab your ankles social media shitheads, you're about to get what you've been begging for.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Well, first off my dick is never angry.

Second, the Repubs claim to be the party of small government and more freedoms.

Also, they are the ones in power doing this now. I was just as upset with that Dems and Reno.

We freely and happily give up way too many of our rights

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i imagine we've all had an angry dick at times.

ANYWAY -

the dems claim to be the party for the poor. the left claims to care about freedom of speech. no one is who they ought to be anymore so to single people out and go GRRRR comes across as an angry dick being waved around. while yes the (R)s are the ones doing it now they are doing it because a class of people are being silenced in our "open" media. MS was just companies getting pissed they couldn't out-do MS so they went the legal route. these are direct consumer related complaints. in all my time at MS i don't recall too many consumers being mad that the OS included things like paint, wordpad, IE, mail and a way to play music. but all this had to be removed so the consumer would choose what they wanted OF WHICH they could do anyway. only the lazy didn't go look.

in the end i don't disagree that the gov needs to stay out. but for things like the catholic kids and the renegade indian, that isn't the gov suing them now is it? a vast majority of lawsuits are coming yes from the right but really our government saying WE'RE GOING TO COURT!!!

it's the people being silenced doing that. if it's twitters right to shadow ban them (and it is i suppose) then it's their right to take it to court and find out what rights if any are being violated now isn't it? whether you and i agree with their moves or not doesn't matter.

it's about to get very expensive for facebook, google, twitter and even MS as they try to checkmark "news" for people. "the people" obviously don't want that and this is their return fire.

How long till they move to sites like this one?

The once “free” speech of the Internet is being given back one piece at a time and far too many people are happy about doing so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

good question. social sites centralize communication but twitter is nothing but an RSS feed on 'roids. technically it is not at all spectacular. but moving to these sites did prompt people to abandon sites like this because there simply wasn't enough traffic. this site succeeds for a variety of reasons, some i appreciate, some i wish would stop (people anyway) but i can ignore 'em and to shut them up cause i don't like 'em well, that means i could be shut up also, huh?

kinda the problem on twitter, facebook and many social sites. one mindset *is* telling the other to shut up and people say "free service" so they roll with it. HOWEVER, if using my privacy and surfing habits to make money, well it's not "free" anymore, is it? i am in some form paying for the service. now if i'm paying for it, the rules change.

this is what the big boys get to figure out. agree/disagree like/love/hate - doesn't matter. it's happening and it's going to come full force into their face like a nuclear boomerang. and it will be very expensive. in the end the gov WILL tell them how to operate and this idea of "run their business their way" is going to fade. it happens as a normal life cycle and it's happening again. you saw reno/ms, this is a repeat.

circle of life.

it's not right, left, dem, repub or the like. it's people. now will people come back to forums like these? likely not. those who want to visit them already do. some may look for smaller more meaningful conversations but most are likely just burnt out on a lot of this.

I am not talking about people moving to sites like this, I am talking about sites like this being the next target for law suits and attacks.

Can I sue this site for banning me for a week for something I see people do 100 times a day without repercussions?

Should I be able to sue another website that soft banned me for calling Trump a misogynist jerk?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

maybe. but isn't it someones "right" to sue? sooner or later we just go past that being a viable option. my point is there comes a time you crossover from one phase to the next. while someone could try to sue me in here they won't get far and even if they did, what would they get vs. the cost to get it? not much, quite a bit, don't do it. facebook/twitter and so forth have much deeper pockets. right or wrong, the lawsuits are coming. also, when the news is intentionally shading one mindset for another, when are they held accountable or is that ok also? we have a government and judicial system and hell, a religion so we can at least run under the pretense of ultimate justice for the wrongs we've endured in life. when one extreme gets too loud, the other extreme takes it down. nature of the beast.

also - just because you don't see a mod "do something" doesn't mean they didn't. they don't need to make every move public and i don't need to see them apply their rules to me to all just so i feel better about being here. when i get my occasional "cut it out" it's because of something i did. while i see others who do the same (and a lot worse) i have zero idea what if anything the mods have done to them as well.

why should i know? i'll worry about myself and move on. if it gets to the point where i don't like it here, i'll leave. but not many run under that mindset and many have an "entitled" sense about them.

should you be able to sue a site for something like that? well you can try. chance winning and your cost involved will keep that from happening.

that really doesn't apply to the big boys - like it or not.

It is not about money, never has been. It is about control...do it our way or we will force you to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[iceberg]

i imagine we've all had an angry dick at times.

ANYWAY -

the dems claim to be the party for the poor. the left claims to care about freedom of speech. no one is who they ought to be anymore so to single people out and go GRRRR comes across as an angry dick being waved around. while yes the (R)s are the ones doing it now they are doing it because a class of people are being silenced in our "open" media. MS was just companies getting pissed they couldn't out-do MS so they went the legal route. these are direct consumer related complaints. in all my time at MS i don't recall too many consumers being mad that the OS included things like paint, wordpad, IE, mail and a way to play music. but all this had to be removed so the consumer would choose what they wanted OF WHICH they could do anyway. only the lazy didn't go look.

in the end i don't disagree that the gov needs to stay out. but for things like the catholic kids and the renegade indian, that isn't the gov suing them now is it? a vast majority of lawsuits are coming yes from the right but really our government saying WE'RE GOING TO COURT!!!

it's the people being silenced doing that. if it's twitters right to shadow ban them (and it is i suppose) then it's their right to take it to court and find out what rights if any are being violated now isn't it? whether you and i agree with their moves or not doesn't matter.

it's about to get very expensive for facebook, google, twitter and even MS as they try to checkmark "news" for people. "the people" obviously don't want that and this is their return fire.

How long till they move to sites like this one?

The once “free” speech of the Internet is being given back one piece at a time and far too many people are happy about doing so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

good question. social sites centralize communication but twitter is nothing but an RSS feed on 'roids. technically it is not at all spectacular. but moving to these sites did prompt people to abandon sites like this because there simply wasn't enough traffic. this site succeeds for a variety of reasons, some i appreciate, some i wish would stop (people anyway) but i can ignore 'em and to shut them up cause i don't like 'em well, that means i could be shut up also, huh?

kinda the problem on twitter, facebook and many social sites. one mindset *is* telling the other to shut up and people say "free service" so they roll with it. HOWEVER, if using my privacy and surfing habits to make money, well it's not "free" anymore, is it? i am in some form paying for the service. now if i'm paying for it, the rules change.

this is what the big boys get to figure out. agree/disagree like/love/hate - doesn't matter. it's happening and it's going to come full force into their face like a nuclear boomerang. and it will be very expensive. in the end the gov WILL tell them how to operate and this idea of "run their business their way" is going to fade. it happens as a normal life cycle and it's happening again. you saw reno/ms, this is a repeat.

circle of life.

it's not right, left, dem, repub or the like. it's people. now will people come back to forums like these? likely not. those who want to visit them already do. some may look for smaller more meaningful conversations but most are likely just burnt out on a lot of this.

I am not talking about people moving to sites like this, I am talking about sites like this being the next target for law suits and attacks.

Can I sue this site for banning me for a week for something I see people do 100 times a day without repercussions?

Should I be able to sue another website that soft banned me for calling Trump a misogynist jerk?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

maybe. but isn't it someones "right" to sue? sooner or later we just go past that being a viable option. my point is there comes a time you crossover from one phase to the next. while someone could try to sue me in here they won't get far and even if they did, what would they get vs. the cost to get it? not much, quite a bit, don't do it. facebook/twitter and so forth have much deeper pockets. right or wrong, the lawsuits are coming. also, when the news is intentionally shading one mindset for another, when are they held accountable or is that ok also? we have a government and judicial system and hell, a religion so we can at least run under the pretense of ultimate justice for the wrongs we've endured in life. when one extreme gets too loud, the other extreme takes it down. nature of the beast.

also - just because you don't see a mod "do something" doesn't mean they didn't. they don't need to make every move public and i don't need to see them apply their rules to me to all just so i feel better about being here. when i get my occasional "cut it out" it's because of something i did. while i see others who do the same (and a lot worse) i have zero idea what if anything the mods have done to them as well.

why should i know? i'll worry about myself and move on. if it gets to the point where i don't like it here, i'll leave. but not many run under that mindset and many have an "entitled" sense about them.

should you be able to sue a site for something like that? well you can try. chance winning and your cost involved will keep that from happening.

that really doesn't apply to the big boys - like it or not.

It is not about money, never has been. It is about control...do it our way or we will force you to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

great. take away their money, their control is gone also.

 

[mdk]

Parody accounts hurt my wittle feelings. Better sue for a silly amount of money.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

How long till they move to sites like this one?

The once “free” speech of the Internet is being given back one piece at a time and far too many people are happy about doing so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

good question. social sites centralize communication but twitter is nothing but an RSS feed on 'roids. technically it is not at all spectacular. but moving to these sites did prompt people to abandon sites like this because there simply wasn't enough traffic. this site succeeds for a variety of reasons, some i appreciate, some i wish would stop (people anyway) but i can ignore 'em and to shut them up cause i don't like 'em well, that means i could be shut up also, huh?

kinda the problem on twitter, facebook and many social sites. one mindset *is* telling the other to shut up and people say "free service" so they roll with it. HOWEVER, if using my privacy and surfing habits to make money, well it's not "free" anymore, is it? i am in some form paying for the service. now if i'm paying for it, the rules change.

this is what the big boys get to figure out. agree/disagree like/love/hate - doesn't matter. it's happening and it's going to come full force into their face like a nuclear boomerang. and it will be very expensive. in the end the gov WILL tell them how to operate and this idea of "run their business their way" is going to fade. it happens as a normal life cycle and it's happening again. you saw reno/ms, this is a repeat.

circle of life.

it's not right, left, dem, repub or the like. it's people. now will people come back to forums like these? likely not. those who want to visit them already do. some may look for smaller more meaningful conversations but most are likely just burnt out on a lot of this.

I am not talking about people moving to sites like this, I am talking about sites like this being the next target for law suits and attacks.

Can I sue this site for banning me for a week for something I see people do 100 times a day without repercussions?

Should I be able to sue another website that soft banned me for calling Trump a misogynist jerk?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

maybe. but isn't it someones "right" to sue? sooner or later we just go past that being a viable option. my point is there comes a time you crossover from one phase to the next. while someone could try to sue me in here they won't get far and even if they did, what would they get vs. the cost to get it? not much, quite a bit, don't do it. facebook/twitter and so forth have much deeper pockets. right or wrong, the lawsuits are coming. also, when the news is intentionally shading one mindset for another, when are they held accountable or is that ok also? we have a government and judicial system and hell, a religion so we can at least run under the pretense of ultimate justice for the wrongs we've endured in life. when one extreme gets too loud, the other extreme takes it down. nature of the beast.

also - just because you don't see a mod "do something" doesn't mean they didn't. they don't need to make every move public and i don't need to see them apply their rules to me to all just so i feel better about being here. when i get my occasional "cut it out" it's because of something i did. while i see others who do the same (and a lot worse) i have zero idea what if anything the mods have done to them as well.

why should i know? i'll worry about myself and move on. if it gets to the point where i don't like it here, i'll leave. but not many run under that mindset and many have an "entitled" sense about them.

should you be able to sue a site for something like that? well you can try. chance winning and your cost involved will keep that from happening.

that really doesn't apply to the big boys - like it or not.

It is not about money, never has been. It is about control...do it our way or we will force you to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

great. take away their money, their control is gone also.

The government has endless money and they are the ones fighting for control.

But to you that is great.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[mdk]

I am going to go rushing to the courts if I ever get banned from here. I have a right to be hosted on your server USMB! This is your only warning.

 

[iceberg]

good question. social sites centralize communication but twitter is nothing but an RSS feed on 'roids. technically it is not at all spectacular. but moving to these sites did prompt people to abandon sites like this because there simply wasn't enough traffic. this site succeeds for a variety of reasons, some i appreciate, some i wish would stop (people anyway) but i can ignore 'em and to shut them up cause i don't like 'em well, that means i could be shut up also, huh?

kinda the problem on twitter, facebook and many social sites. one mindset *is* telling the other to shut up and people say "free service" so they roll with it. HOWEVER, if using my privacy and surfing habits to make money, well it's not "free" anymore, is it? i am in some form paying for the service. now if i'm paying for it, the rules change.

this is what the big boys get to figure out. agree/disagree like/love/hate - doesn't matter. it's happening and it's going to come full force into their face like a nuclear boomerang. and it will be very expensive. in the end the gov WILL tell them how to operate and this idea of "run their business their way" is going to fade. it happens as a normal life cycle and it's happening again. you saw reno/ms, this is a repeat.

circle of life.

it's not right, left, dem, repub or the like. it's people. now will people come back to forums like these? likely not. those who want to visit them already do. some may look for smaller more meaningful conversations but most are likely just burnt out on a lot of this.

I am not talking about people moving to sites like this, I am talking about sites like this being the next target for law suits and attacks.

Can I sue this site for banning me for a week for something I see people do 100 times a day without repercussions?

Should I be able to sue another website that soft banned me for calling Trump a misogynist jerk?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

maybe. but isn't it someones "right" to sue? sooner or later we just go past that being a viable option. my point is there comes a time you crossover from one phase to the next. while someone could try to sue me in here they won't get far and even if they did, what would they get vs. the cost to get it? not much, quite a bit, don't do it. facebook/twitter and so forth have much deeper pockets. right or wrong, the lawsuits are coming. also, when the news is intentionally shading one mindset for another, when are they held accountable or is that ok also? we have a government and judicial system and hell, a religion so we can at least run under the pretense of ultimate justice for the wrongs we've endured in life. when one extreme gets too loud, the other extreme takes it down. nature of the beast.

also - just because you don't see a mod "do something" doesn't mean they didn't. they don't need to make every move public and i don't need to see them apply their rules to me to all just so i feel better about being here. when i get my occasional "cut it out" it's because of something i did. while i see others who do the same (and a lot worse) i have zero idea what if anything the mods have done to them as well.

why should i know? i'll worry about myself and move on. if it gets to the point where i don't like it here, i'll leave. but not many run under that mindset and many have an "entitled" sense about them.

should you be able to sue a site for something like that? well you can try. chance winning and your cost involved will keep that from happening.

that really doesn't apply to the big boys - like it or not.

It is not about money, never has been. It is about control...do it our way or we will force you to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

great. take away their money, their control is gone also.

The government has endless money and they are the ones fighting for control.

But to you that is great.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i didn't say government, i said twitter/facebook and so forth. last i checked, sandy, that ain't the gov.

you keep getting pissed off at shit i've never said. very annoying for you to "but you love that shit" when you're not even getting it right.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I am not talking about people moving to sites like this, I am talking about sites like this being the next target for law suits and attacks.

Can I sue this site for banning me for a week for something I see people do 100 times a day without repercussions?

Should I be able to sue another website that soft banned me for calling Trump a misogynist jerk?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

maybe. but isn't it someones "right" to sue? sooner or later we just go past that being a viable option. my point is there comes a time you crossover from one phase to the next. while someone could try to sue me in here they won't get far and even if they did, what would they get vs. the cost to get it? not much, quite a bit, don't do it. facebook/twitter and so forth have much deeper pockets. right or wrong, the lawsuits are coming. also, when the news is intentionally shading one mindset for another, when are they held accountable or is that ok also? we have a government and judicial system and hell, a religion so we can at least run under the pretense of ultimate justice for the wrongs we've endured in life. when one extreme gets too loud, the other extreme takes it down. nature of the beast.

also - just because you don't see a mod "do something" doesn't mean they didn't. they don't need to make every move public and i don't need to see them apply their rules to me to all just so i feel better about being here. when i get my occasional "cut it out" it's because of something i did. while i see others who do the same (and a lot worse) i have zero idea what if anything the mods have done to them as well.

why should i know? i'll worry about myself and move on. if it gets to the point where i don't like it here, i'll leave. but not many run under that mindset and many have an "entitled" sense about them.

should you be able to sue a site for something like that? well you can try. chance winning and your cost involved will keep that from happening.

that really doesn't apply to the big boys - like it or not.

It is not about money, never has been. It is about control...do it our way or we will force you to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

great. take away their money, their control is gone also.

The government has endless money and they are the ones fighting for control.

But to you that is great.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i didn't say government, i said twitter/facebook and so forth. last i checked, sandy, that ain't the gov.

you keep getting pissed off at shit i've never said. very annoying for you to "but you love that shit" when you're not even getting it right.

It is the government wanting to control Twitter and FB and so forth. That is what this is all about.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[iceberg]

maybe. but isn't it someones "right" to sue? sooner or later we just go past that being a viable option. my point is there comes a time you crossover from one phase to the next. while someone could try to sue me in here they won't get far and even if they did, what would they get vs. the cost to get it? not much, quite a bit, don't do it. facebook/twitter and so forth have much deeper pockets. right or wrong, the lawsuits are coming. also, when the news is intentionally shading one mindset for another, when are they held accountable or is that ok also? we have a government and judicial system and hell, a religion so we can at least run under the pretense of ultimate justice for the wrongs we've endured in life. when one extreme gets too loud, the other extreme takes it down. nature of the beast.

also - just because you don't see a mod "do something" doesn't mean they didn't. they don't need to make every move public and i don't need to see them apply their rules to me to all just so i feel better about being here. when i get my occasional "cut it out" it's because of something i did. while i see others who do the same (and a lot worse) i have zero idea what if anything the mods have done to them as well.

why should i know? i'll worry about myself and move on. if it gets to the point where i don't like it here, i'll leave. but not many run under that mindset and many have an "entitled" sense about them.

should you be able to sue a site for something like that? well you can try. chance winning and your cost involved will keep that from happening.

that really doesn't apply to the big boys - like it or not.

It is not about money, never has been. It is about control...do it our way or we will force you to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

great. take away their money, their control is gone also.

The government has endless money and they are the ones fighting for control.

But to you that is great.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i didn't say government, i said twitter/facebook and so forth. last i checked, sandy, that ain't the gov.

you keep getting pissed off at shit i've never said. very annoying for you to "but you love that shit" when you're not even getting it right.

It is the government wanting to control Twitter and FB and so forth. That is what this is all about.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and it has been that way for a long long long time illustrated by my MS conversation. what i have been saying you're either choosing to ignore, not capable of comprehending, or intentionally twisting around is that its not economically feasible to sue someone in here.

it is on facebook/twitter. their own actions to play favorites have brought this upon them. the people are asking the gov to get involved vs. in the MS days, businesses did.

the gov is gonna do what the gov is gonna do, has done, and will continue to do.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It is not about money, never has been. It is about control...do it our way or we will force you to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

great. take away their money, their control is gone also.

The government has endless money and they are the ones fighting for control.

But to you that is great.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

i didn't say government, i said twitter/facebook and so forth. last i checked, sandy, that ain't the gov.

you keep getting pissed off at shit i've never said. very annoying for you to "but you love that shit" when you're not even getting it right.

It is the government wanting to control Twitter and FB and so forth. That is what this is all about.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

and it has been that way for a long long long time illustrated by my MS conversation. what i have been saying you're either choosing to ignore, not capable of comprehending, or intentionally twisting around is that its not economically feasible to sue someone in here.

it is on facebook/twitter. their own actions to play favorites have brought this upon them. the people are asking the gov to get involved vs. in the MS days, businesses did.

the gov is gonna do what the gov is gonna do, has done, and will continue to do.

I find your “it is what the government does” reasoning to be a bit weak.

This is the reasoning that allows them to keep taking more and more of our rights and liberties all the while the populous just smiles and ask “what can I give up next to the government?”.

Sooner or later we will run out of rights you do not give a shit about and they will come for ones you do care about.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com