Political censorship is fake right lefties?

[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

"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

You can't argue the merits or results so you jump to asinine conclusions to merit your position.

I'll ask you again, was the Mathematician talking about killing liberals?

 

[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.

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.

Then twitter has to come out and say "We ban conservative opinion"

 

[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.

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.

So you want the government to nationalize social media?

 

[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.

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.

No, it isn't. If there's one power company in your town, you get one choice of where your power is coming from.

You have literally millions of choices of where you can go on the internet. As does everyone else in this country.

And instead of using your power of choice to find a site that suits you, you insist that YOU get to set rules for all sites, creating requirements for all of them, that only YOU get to decide are met or not.

Um, nope.

 

[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.

Doesn't newsmax or infowars have some webstite

They don't serve the purpose of a commons that the social media platforms do.

 

[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 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.

Then twitter has to come out and say "We ban conservative opinion"

There's no such requirement. You've made it up.

And your imagination obligates no one to do anything

 

[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.

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.

More "I heart silencing people I disagree with, and I heart it more when someone else does it for me"

Fucking Fascist, FOAD.

 

[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.

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

It’s not. They don’t control traffic, their users make a conscious decision about where to direct their usage and given the equal playing field of the internet, those users could chose any social media they desire.

There is no natural monopoly online. The opposite is true.

 

[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.

Doesn't newsmax or infowars have some webstite

They don't serve the purpose of a commons that the social media platforms do.

The internet itself serves the purpose of the commons. You can go to literally millions of sites. You can make your own.

And you can make up the rules for the space you create. Just like they set the rules for the space they create.

 

[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.

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.

Then twitter has to come out and say "We ban conservative opinion"

There's no such requirement. You've made it up.

And your imagination obligates no one to do anything

Their TOS binds them, and theirs makes up shit about them being an open platform.

They then claim opposing views are some form of banned speech.

Again, you miserable cat lady twat, you support this because you are a fucking miserable fascist fuck.

 

[bodecea]

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

So, it's political censorship if someone is banned for their political comments on....let's say...a forum like this one?

 

[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.

More "I heart silencing people I disagree with, and I heart it more when someone else does it for me"

Fucking Fascist, FOAD.

You can say anything you'd like. You just can't say it on my website. Or anyone else's website but your own. You do not have a right to someone else's space.

Thus, there are no 'rights' to be violated, as the 'right' you've made up doesn't exist.

 

[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

So, it's political censorship if someone is banned for their political comments on....let's say...a forum like this one?

Or Infowars. Or Storm Front. Or any of a myriad of conservative message boards?

 

[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 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.

Then twitter has to come out and say "We ban conservative opinion"

There's no such requirement. You've made it up.

And your imagination obligates no one to do anything

Their TOS binds them, and theirs makes up shit about them being an open platform.

It doesn't. As they are the arbiters of what violates their terms of service.

So you've made up an imaginary requirement.....and set YOURSELF as the arbiter of whether or not your imagination has been satisfied.

Neither of those work in reality. As your requirements don't exist. And you aren't the arbiter of anyone else's space.

Make your own. None of your rights are being violated.....as you have no right to anyone else's space.

 

[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

So, it's political censorship if someone is banned for their political comments on....let's say...a forum like this one?

This forum is nothing like Facebook or Twitter. Have you ever seen me cry about censorship on this board? EVER?

 

[TheParser]

I am sure that President Biden, the healer, and Vice President Harris will work very hard during the next four years to ensure that all views are allowed on Twitter & Facebook.

Also, both Ms. Nancy in the House & Mr. Chuck in the Senate want all points of view expressed on those platforms, for both of them are liberals. and liberals are wonderful tolerant people.

 

[colfax_m]

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

So, it's political censorship if someone is banned for their political comments on....let's say...a forum like this one?

This forum is nothing like Facebook or Twitter. Have you ever seen me cry about censorship on this board? EVER?

That’s not true. We are all users who make accounts and submit content to be displayed on the website.

Pretty much the same thing.

 

[BlindBoo]

Freedom of the press means they are free to not publish as directed by the Government.

We have the most eclectic sources of information in the history of mankind.

 

[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

So, it's political censorship if someone is banned for their political comments on....let's say...a forum like this one?

This forum is nothing like Facebook or Twitter. Have you ever seen me cry about censorship on this board? EVER?

Well, one, this is a very conservative message board. Two, people get banned from this space all the time.

If they say they were banned for their politics, how is that different than your claims about Facebook?

 

[Skylar]

Freedom of the press means they are free to not publish as directed by the Government.

We have the most eclectic sources of information in the history of mankind.

The first word in the first amendment demonstrates the absurdity of this entire argument.

Their argument is wildly Marxist.