Political censorship is fake right lefties?

[22lcidw]

Twitter

Twitter bans the Mathematician as he testifies.

Political options that don't conform to the acceptable narrative will be roundly EXECUTED.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BREAK UP THESE GESTAPO ENTITIES. They are the modern day public squares and must be treated as such.

The media in our nation is the spark that will lead to our downfall

A message board is NOT a modern day public square. Its not public, but private. You do not have a right to post on twitter anymore than you do here.

You guys don't seem to get how the 1st amendment actually works. Read its first word to realize your folly.

You are the evil. That is actually how it works.

 

[martybegan]

Twitter

Twitter bans the Mathematician as he testifies.

Political options that don't conform to the acceptable narrative will be roundly EXECUTED.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BREAK UP THESE GESTAPO ENTITIES. They are the modern day public squares and must be treated as such.

The media in our nation is the spark that will lead to our downfall

censorship is real

some speech is censored

conservative sites censor liberals

decent sites censor “hate speech”

you may go to parlor and talk about how much fun you are going to have when you get to use your liberal hunting permit.

or how much to rent a helicoptor to toss liberals out of

and how to make liberals pay for the helicoptor rental

but decent people who own sites have a right to deny that kind of speech

example: you can say anything you want in your own house but you may not say those things in my house.

More "I support this because it silences people I don't like and I am a fascist twat"

 

[Skylar]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

 

[colfax_m]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They have created a new political commons, and need to be treated as such.

They created it so they control it. That’s how it works in America.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Twitter

Twitter bans the Mathematician as he testifies.

Political options that don't conform to the acceptable narrative will be roundly EXECUTED.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BREAK UP THESE GESTAPO ENTITIES. They are the modern day public squares and must be treated as such.

The media in our nation is the spark that will lead to our downfall

censorship is real

some speech is censored

conservative sites censor liberals

decent sites censor “hate speech”

you may go to parlor and talk about how much fun you are going to have when you get to use your liberal hunting permit.

or how much to rent a helicoptor to toss liberals out of

and how to make liberals pay for the helicoptor rental

but decent people who own sites have a right to deny that kind of speech

example: you can say anything you want in your own house but you may not say those things in my house.

More "I support this because it silences people I don't like and I am a fascist twat"

His comment is asinine.

Was the Mathematician talking about killing liberals?

Ridiculous

 

[Skylar]

Twitter

Twitter bans the Mathematician as he testifies.

Political options that don't conform to the acceptable narrative will be roundly EXECUTED.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BREAK UP THESE GESTAPO ENTITIES. They are the modern day public squares and must be treated as such.

The media in our nation is the spark that will lead to our downfall

A message board is NOT a modern day public square. Its not public, but private. You do not have a right to post on twitter anymore than you do here.

You guys don't seem to get how the 1st amendment actually works. Read its first word to realize your folly.

You are the evil. That is actually how it works.

Or.....not being able to post whatever you want on Facebook has no particular moral connotations.

You don't have a right to someone else's private property.

 

[martybegan]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

So power companies can pick and choose who they provide power to? It's called a Utility. Making these companies utilities in the interest of opening political dialogue isn't much of a stretch.

 

[martybegan]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They have created a new political commons, and need to be treated as such.

They created it so they control it. That’s how it works in America.

BAKE THAT FUCKING CAKE, PEASANT

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They have created a new political commons, and need to be treated as such.

They created it so they control it. That’s how it works in America.

Tell that to those who created our highways, phone lines and airports.

At some point you people will realize that things become integral to our society and without proper oversight they WILL BE ABUSED

 

[Skylar]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

So power companies can pick and choose who they provide power to? It's called a Utility. Making these companies utilities in the interest of opening political dialogue isn't much of a stretch.

Any company can set standards of conduct. You can get banned here too. And if you want to create your OWN messageboard or online space, you can set the rules of that too.

Instead, in your entitlement, you insist that you have a right to someone else's space, and that they must obey whatever rules you make up.

Nope. Its the other way around. They get to set the rules for their space. You get to set the rules for your space.

See how that works?

 

[martybegan]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

So power companies can pick and choose who they provide power to? It's called a Utility. Making these companies utilities in the interest of opening political dialogue isn't much of a stretch.

Any company can set standards of conduct. You can get banned here too. And if you want to create your OWN messageboard or online space, you can set the rules of that too.

Instead, in your entitlement, you insist that you have a right to someone else's space, and that they must obey whatever rules you make up.

Nope. Its the other way around. They get to set the rules for their space. You get to set the rules for your space.

See how that works?

So their rules of conduct should explicitly state "we ban conservative speech". Instead they don't say that and pretend to be content neutral.

Just admit you agree with silencing people you disagree with, stop lying to the board and yourself.

 

[colfax_m]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

So power companies can pick and choose who they provide power to? It's called a Utility. Making these companies utilities in the interest of opening political dialogue isn't much of a stretch.

It’s a huge stretch since the fundamentals of a natural monopoly are drastically different between a power company and a website. In fact, they couldn’t be more different.

 

[bendog]

Twitter

Twitter bans the Mathematician as he testifies.

Political options that don't conform to the acceptable narrative will be roundly EXECUTED.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BREAK UP THESE GESTAPO ENTITIES. They are the modern day public squares and must be treated as such.

The media in our nation is the spark that will lead to our downfall

A message board is NOT a modern day public square. Its not public, but private. You do not have a right to post on twitter anymore than you do here.

You guys don't seem to get how the 1st amendment actually works. Read its first word to realize your folly.

Grandpa's a socialist. Literally. LOL

 

[colfax_m]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They have created a new political commons, and need to be treated as such.

They created it so they control it. That’s how it works in America.

Tell that to those who created our highways, phone lines and airports.

At some point you people will realize that things become integral to our society and without proper oversight they WILL BE ABUSED

Our highways and airports were created by the government silly. If the government had made Twitter, they would be bound by the first amendment. Twitter is not.

 

[bendog]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

So power companies can pick and choose who they provide power to? It's called a Utility. Making these companies utilities in the interest of opening political dialogue isn't much of a stretch.

Any company can set standards of conduct. You can get banned here too. And if you want to create your OWN messageboard or online space, you can set the rules of that too.

Instead, in your entitlement, you insist that you have a right to someone else's space, and that they must obey whatever rules you make up.

Nope. Its the other way around. They get to set the rules for their space. You get to set the rules for your space.

See how that works?

So their rules of conduct should explicitly state "we ban conservative speech". Instead they don't say that and pretend to be content neutral.

Just admit you agree with silencing people you disagree with, stop lying to the board and yourself.

Doesn't newsmax or infowars have some webstite

 

[danielpalos]

Twitter

Twitter bans the Mathematician as he testifies.

Political options that don't conform to the acceptable narrative will be roundly EXECUTED.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BREAK UP THESE GESTAPO ENTITIES. They are the modern day public squares and must be treated as such.

The media in our nation is the spark that will lead to our downfall

I have been banned here for resorting to the fewest fallacies when right wingers had nothing but fallacy (of argumentum ad hominem). Nazis.

 

[anynameyouwish]

Twitter

Twitter bans the Mathematician as he testifies.

Political options that don't conform to the acceptable narrative will be roundly EXECUTED.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BREAK UP THESE GESTAPO ENTITIES. They are the modern day public squares and must be treated as such.

The media in our nation is the spark that will lead to our downfall

censorship is real

some speech is censored

conservative sites censor liberals

decent sites censor “hate speech”

you may go to parlor and talk about how much fun you are going to have when you get to use your liberal hunting permit.

or how much to rent a helicoptor to toss liberals out of

and how to make liberals pay for the helicoptor rental

but decent people who own sites have a right to deny that kind of speech

example: you can say anything you want in your own house but you may not say those things in my house.

More "I support this because it silences people I don't like and I am a fascist twat"

His comment is asinine.

Was the Mathematician talking about killing liberals?

Ridiculous

"Was the Mathematician talking about killing liberals?"

we are talking about censorship (you stupid moron)

there are certainly right wing pieces of anti-American nazi crap (you!) who enjoy discussing murdering people for disagreeing with you and THAT type of speech is generally censored.....

as it should be

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They have created a new political commons, and need to be treated as such.

They created it so they control it. That’s how it works in America.

Tell that to those who created our highways, phone lines and airports.

At some point you people will realize that things become integral to our society and without proper oversight they WILL BE ABUSED

Our highways and airports were created by the government silly. If the government had made Twitter, they would be bound by the first amendment. Twitter is not.

No they weren't lol.

The names may be synonymous with the government but those entities and structures existed BEFORE the government took over them.

 

[martybegan]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

So power companies can pick and choose who they provide power to? It's called a Utility. Making these companies utilities in the interest of opening political dialogue isn't much of a stretch.

It’s a huge stretch since the fundamentals of a natural monopoly are drastically different between a power company and a website. In fact, they couldn’t be more different.

Actually since 2-3 social media platforms control most of the traffic, the comparison is justified.

 

[Skylar]

I understand it just fine. And Twitter & Facebook are not private. They are publicly owned which puts them under the regulation of the US government

Yes, they are private companies held by private individuals.

They are owned by SHAREHOLDERS not private individuals. And they are subject to the rules and regulations of the US Congress.

Get it yet?

Shareholders don't make it any less private, Comrade. You're insistence that YOUR desire to use someone else's private property magically make that property 'public' is Marxist.

You don't get to magically turn private property into public property simply because you want to use it. That's not how private property works.

The thing is they hide behind a part of the law that shields them from claiming the posts of others as their content, and then try to censor certain views as if it was their content.

Again, you don't care because it's people you hate being silenced.

And by 'hide behind the law', you mean recognize that a private company is private?

If you don't like facebook, retreat to the safespace of Parler or an Infowars message board. Or make your own.

No one owes you a platform. Your argument is dripping with unearned entitlement.

So power companies can pick and choose who they provide power to? It's called a Utility. Making these companies utilities in the interest of opening political dialogue isn't much of a stretch.

Any company can set standards of conduct. You can get banned here too. And if you want to create your OWN messageboard or online space, you can set the rules of that too.

Instead, in your entitlement, you insist that you have a right to someone else's space, and that they must obey whatever rules you make up.

Nope. Its the other way around. They get to set the rules for their space. You get to set the rules for your space.

See how that works?

So their rules of conduct should explicitly state "we ban conservative speech". Instead they don't say that and pretend to be content neutral.

Just admit you agree with silencing people you disagree with, stop lying to the board and yourself.

They can decide what violates their rule of conduct. Not you. You're just making up more imaginary 'requirements' that don't actually exist. And insisting that YOU get to decide when those imaginary requirements are met.

They don't exist. And you don't.

Again, your entitled argument breaks at the same place; They decide for their space. You decide for yours.