- Apr 1, 2011
- Reaction score
It also matters what judges and politicians think, moron.ROFLMAO! trying to substitute invective for an actual argument I see, you think that convinces people that your argument is sound?He didn't incite any riots, you moron sheep.ONCE AGAIN, he was kicked from Facebook for HIS BEHAVIOUR, Facebook didn't want to be associated with him after Jan.6 and didn't want him using their platform to incite any more riots.Uh huh. Horseshit, all of it.LOL, okay apparently you are operating in a vacuum where you can make up the law as you go, and your presence on THIS site is all the evidence required that you agree that common sense is on my side.The law does not say otherwise. Common sense damn sure doesn't say otherwise.So says YOU, the law and common sense says otherwise and thank the heavens for it, if it didn’t neither of us would be posting “curated, non-illegal” content on USMB right now.When Facebook curates the non-illegal content its members post, it's acting as a publisher.Every company is responsible for the content that the company’s directors, it’s employees or designated representatives publish acting on the companies behalf. What Facebook isn’t responsible for is the content its USERS “publish” on it’s platform, same reason USMB isn’t responsible for USER generated content on its platform. However they are still required to remove ILLEGAL content (such IP theft, child porn, etc..,) posted by their users and can be held liable for not doing it.Indeed. Yet the socials insist they're platforms and are not responsible for their content.Publishers censor content they don’t agree with, always have,.By censoring ideas they do not agree with, they are a publisher, not a platform, and should not be granted the protections platforms enjoy.Sure it is, it’s regulated but it’s still free. Government isn’t inserting themselves into the transactions between Facebook and its customers (other than to take its cut), from what I understand they don’t have any special immunity to anti-trust laws though, I mean other than their ability to buy politicians that is.A private corporation given special dispensation from libel and anti-trust laws....That's not a "free market" by any stretch.
Facebook has all the same rights to regulate speech on its platform (I.e. it’s PROPERTY) as you do to throw some schmuck off your property for planting campaign signs on your front lawn.
IMHO it’s a good system that promotes free expression while protecting the private entities that facilitate it.
Just go ahead and admit you like it when conservatives are silenced.
Why would I “like it” when conservatives are silenced? I’m conservative myself, and I’m not advocating for anybody to be silenced, YOU ARE, you’re advocating what amounts to putting Facebook out of business, not because they silenced Donny (he hasn’t been “silenced” he talks all the time and gets published when he does) but for kicking him off their PRIVATE PROPERTY because of his behaviour, they didn’t do it to him, he did it to himself, time for Donny to take some PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for his own actions.
You know what Trump's terrible, awful, no-good last Facebook post was?
View attachment 497440
How utterly mean and bad!
This is the part where you look like an idiot. You don't have to acknowledge it.
I didn't say anything about what he posted or didn't post.
Learn how to read.
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." -- Socrates
... anyways, doesn't matter what I think or what you think about his part in that riot, it only matters what FACEBOOK MANAGEMENT thinks, and they specifically pointed out what they perceived as a public safety threat posed by Donny when they kicked him off there platform.
If it makes you feel any better it looks like they're going to let Donny back on the platform in 2023, 2 year ban.