What a great idea. Let’s give my buddy Biden the authority to shut down websites he doesn’t like by selectively enforcing standards. If you righties think your voices are supressed now wait til we tell you what is decent and what is lawsuit worthy.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
End the opinion based news outlets with it. And tell the entertainers and sports players the same.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
All of this is a goldmine to Prog shill agendas. The destruction of people is incredible by those with a cause for saying something stupid or misunderstood. With many of the accusers being just the same or worse. There is a lot of good with social media. There is a lot of bad with it.What a great idea. Let’s give my buddy Biden the authority to shut down websites he doesn’t like by selectively enforcing standards. If you righties think your voices are supressed now wait til we tell you what is decent and what is lawsuit worthy.
Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
I guess USMB needs to just shut down and go home. Imagine having a Big Brother deciding what can and what can't be posted. You all think the Mods are tough, get a load of Big Brother.
You seem to think that Section 230 doesn't affect the message boards. It does. It allows for freedom of expression. Can you imagine having one fringe group to be in charge of the Internet where you happen to be on the receiving end of their ire? I think I will stick with the Mods no matter how close their eyes are together.
American Culture is Idol Worship over & above rugged independence. That's why Hollywood/the music industry determine the clothing trends. The plus side, is that being a successful entrepreneur or inventor & being in the Military are a part of that Idolatry. Perhaps that's what keeps us ticking...those inadvertent plus-sides to our Country's penchant for Idol worship.Trump is nobody's friend. It's baffling to me why people are so quick to just go along with everything he says and does. Over the course of his presidency he has effectively set the table for the wolves to feast on the sheep. But I always reflect back to the reality that so many are content to simply be led. I often think that he was always meant to be a one termer for that very reason.
If 230 gets repealed, you're screwing yourselves.
That makes no sense to do to a Private Business.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
I guess USMB needs to just shut down and go home. Imagine having a Big Brother deciding what can and what can't be posted. You all think the Mods are tough, get a load of Big Brother.
You seem to think that Section 230 doesn't affect the message boards. It does. It allows for freedom of expression. Can you imagine having one fringe group to be in charge of the Internet where you happen to be on the receiving end of their ire? I think I will stick with the Mods no matter how close their eyes are together.
Fine, keep 230, but add a moderators clause to it that must be adhered to. Moderators cannot remove, alter, or flag content that does NOT fall under the guidelines of this clause. If a website decides they want to do their own moderation, then they lose section 230 protection. Twitter and Facebook want immunity from content posted on their site but at the same time, they want the ability to moderate and censor as they see fit. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
That makes no sense to do to a Private Business.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
I guess USMB needs to just shut down and go home. Imagine having a Big Brother deciding what can and what can't be posted. You all think the Mods are tough, get a load of Big Brother.
You seem to think that Section 230 doesn't affect the message boards. It does. It allows for freedom of expression. Can you imagine having one fringe group to be in charge of the Internet where you happen to be on the receiving end of their ire? I think I will stick with the Mods no matter how close their eyes are together.
Fine, keep 230, but add a moderators clause to it that must be adhered to. Moderators cannot remove, alter, or flag content that does NOT fall under the guidelines of this clause. If a website decides they want to do their own moderation, then they lose section 230 protection. Twitter and Facebook want immunity from content posted on their site but at the same time, they want the ability to moderate and censor as they see fit. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
They already can remove everything they don't like. It's the nature of being a private business. The internet is not a store's front windows. It's billions and billions of posts to monitor which, aside from imperfect algorithms which cannot possibly monitor for every situation or new slang that folks develop to subvert them, is impossible. Perhaps you don't get that part - the impossibility of monitoring 100% of content posted. There's entire departments JUST for fielding moderation disputes from the ALGORITHMS alone.That makes no sense to do to a Private Business.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
I guess USMB needs to just shut down and go home. Imagine having a Big Brother deciding what can and what can't be posted. You all think the Mods are tough, get a load of Big Brother.
You seem to think that Section 230 doesn't affect the message boards. It does. It allows for freedom of expression. Can you imagine having one fringe group to be in charge of the Internet where you happen to be on the receiving end of their ire? I think I will stick with the Mods no matter how close their eyes are together.
Fine, keep 230, but add a moderators clause to it that must be adhered to. Moderators cannot remove, alter, or flag content that does NOT fall under the guidelines of this clause. If a website decides they want to do their own moderation, then they lose section 230 protection. Twitter and Facebook want immunity from content posted on their site but at the same time, they want the ability to moderate and censor as they see fit. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
Then remove section 230. If they are going to moderate, then let them fully moderate. They can remove anything and everything they don't like. If a group of folks plastered offensive posters all over the front of my business and they were NOT removed in a reasonable amount of time, that business could be held liable. If all businesses had section 230 protection, they could choose to leave those posters up and only take down ones that were offensive to them. That is essentially what is going on with Facebook and Twitter.
They already can remove everything they don't like. It's the nature of being a private business. The internet is not a store's front windows. It's billions and billions of posts to monitor which, aside from imperfect algorithms which cannot possibly monitor for every situation or new slang that folks develop to subvert them, is impossible. Perhaps you don't get that part - the impossibility of monitoring 100% of content posted. There's entire departments JUST for fielding moderation disputes from the ALGORITHMS alone.That makes no sense to do to a Private Business.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
I guess USMB needs to just shut down and go home. Imagine having a Big Brother deciding what can and what can't be posted. You all think the Mods are tough, get a load of Big Brother.
You seem to think that Section 230 doesn't affect the message boards. It does. It allows for freedom of expression. Can you imagine having one fringe group to be in charge of the Internet where you happen to be on the receiving end of their ire? I think I will stick with the Mods no matter how close their eyes are together.
Fine, keep 230, but add a moderators clause to it that must be adhered to. Moderators cannot remove, alter, or flag content that does NOT fall under the guidelines of this clause. If a website decides they want to do their own moderation, then they lose section 230 protection. Twitter and Facebook want immunity from content posted on their site but at the same time, they want the ability to moderate and censor as they see fit. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
Then remove section 230. If they are going to moderate, then let them fully moderate. They can remove anything and everything they don't like. If a group of folks plastered offensive posters all over the front of my business and they were NOT removed in a reasonable amount of time, that business could be held liable. If all businesses had section 230 protection, they could choose to leave those posters up and only take down ones that were offensive to them. That is essentially what is going on with Facebook and Twitter.
Usually, people are more pragmatic than being that daft to the nature of what they're attempting to impose upon, especially free-market folks...but when there's a literally Cult following around a megalomaniac, all values are subverted and out the window.
That makes no sense. A business is free to walk and chew gum. If they don't want someone putting <legal>porn, for example, on their website then that's their prerogative. Conversely, if they miss a poster who plasters <illegal>porn on their site because of the impossibility of 100% moderation - they should not be held liable but instead, the poster should. Unless, of course, they're involved.They already can remove everything they don't like. It's the nature of being a private business. The internet is not a store's front windows. It's billions and billions of posts to monitor which, aside from imperfect algorithms which cannot possibly monitor for every situation or new slang that folks develop to subvert them, is impossible. Perhaps you don't get that part - the impossibility of monitoring 100% of content posted. There's entire departments JUST for fielding moderation disputes from the ALGORITHMS alone.That makes no sense to do to a Private Business.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
I guess USMB needs to just shut down and go home. Imagine having a Big Brother deciding what can and what can't be posted. You all think the Mods are tough, get a load of Big Brother.
You seem to think that Section 230 doesn't affect the message boards. It does. It allows for freedom of expression. Can you imagine having one fringe group to be in charge of the Internet where you happen to be on the receiving end of their ire? I think I will stick with the Mods no matter how close their eyes are together.
Fine, keep 230, but add a moderators clause to it that must be adhered to. Moderators cannot remove, alter, or flag content that does NOT fall under the guidelines of this clause. If a website decides they want to do their own moderation, then they lose section 230 protection. Twitter and Facebook want immunity from content posted on their site but at the same time, they want the ability to moderate and censor as they see fit. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
Then remove section 230. If they are going to moderate, then let them fully moderate. They can remove anything and everything they don't like. If a group of folks plastered offensive posters all over the front of my business and they were NOT removed in a reasonable amount of time, that business could be held liable. If all businesses had section 230 protection, they could choose to leave those posters up and only take down ones that were offensive to them. That is essentially what is going on with Facebook and Twitter.
Usually, people are more pragmatic than being that daft to the nature of what they're attempting to impose upon, especially free-market folks...but when there's a literally Cult following around a megalomaniac, all values are subverted and out the window.
I am ok with having 230 as long as they can't couple it with moderation.
I know you're having trouble putting food on the table and could be evicted from your home, but Section 230 needs to be repealed so thin-skinned twats can file frivolous lawsuits every time someone on social media hurts their feels.
Well, I'll have to get that Kindle after all, if USMB goes away. I'll miss it, but I've thought for a long time that social media takes free speech way too far. So I suppose there has to be a price to pay.
But take a poster like me, for instance, who behaves fairly well unless provoked, and could be even more polite, if pressed. Why would USMB be afraid to have me speaking? I'm not special--most people can behave themselves if they have to, and a lot of the posters here already do. So why couldn't we all continue, on FB, Twitter, Message boards, etc., just civilly? What am I missing? Why does it have to be the end of discussion? Who would sue USMB for an opinion? Like what kind? I guess I need some examples of what people are worried about.
Sane replies only please.
/----/ As long as USMB survives - it's all we need.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
/----/ As long as USMB survives - it's all we need.Mitch McConnell has included the repeal of section 230 as a prerequisite for $2000 stimulus checks as a means of blocking that stimulus from happening. Trump supporters think that doing that will force social media organizations to let them post whatever violent, racist insanities they want, but what it will really do is completely end social media. No more Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Breitbart comment section, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea.
McConnell ties full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2,000 stimulus checks
It’s a poison pill for Democrats.www.theverge.com
Fine, keep 230, but add a moderators clause to it that must be adhered to. Moderators cannot remove, alter, or flag content that does NOT fall under the guidelines of this clause. If a website decides they want to do their own moderation, then they lose section 230 protection. Twitter and Facebook want immunity from content posted on their site but at the same time, they want the ability to moderate and censor as they see fit. They can't have their cake and eat it too.