Should businesses be required to treat everyone equally and impartially?

[dblack]

In another thread we were discussing what Trump and the Republicans are after with the lawsuit against Twitter, and their desire to "crack down" on social media.

bripat9643 offered the following:

Fixing the system means forcing Twitter and Facebook to treat people equally and impartially.

I'm not calling out bri here, just wondering if that's a general consensus. Should we require businesses to treat everyone equally and impartially?

 

[TNHarley]

Nope. And we need to scrap PA laws as well. Its fucking bullshit. Clear violations of the bill of rights.

 

[kyzr]

More useless regulations if they do, also, who would enforce it?.
If a business doesn't treat people right their business and investment fails.

 

[BrokeLoser]

In another thread we were discussing what Trump and the Republicans are after with the lawsuit against Twitter, and their desire to "crack down" on social media.

bripat9643 offered the following:


I'm not calling out bri here, just wonder if that's a general consensus. Should we require businesses to treat everyone equally and impartially?

You’re trying real hard to frame the debate by hoping folks are retarded enough to equate Facebook, Twitter, the google faggots and Jeff Bezos with the religious Baker in Podunk, AL….but you fail miserably.

 

[dblack]

You’re trying real hard to frame the debate by hoping folks are retarded enough to equate Facebook, Twitter, the google faggots and Jeff Bezos with the religious Baker in Podunk, AL….but you fail miserably.

How so? Why is it "different when we do it"?

 

[Damaged Eagle]

In another thread we were discussing what Trump and the Republicans are after with the lawsuit against Twitter, and their desire to "crack down" on social media.

bripat9643 offered the following:


I'm not calling out bri here, just wonder if that's a general consensus. Should we require businesses to treat everyone equally and impartially?

So now it's OK for a business to refuse service to someone if the customer doesn't conform to that businesses standards, ethics, morals, and even religious beliefs?

*****SMILE*****

 

[BrokeLoser]

How so? Why is it "different when we do it"?

You have to consider scale bud…this shit isn’t complicated for anyone even half sane…Think down the lines of antitrust laws and regulations and how they’re supposed to work to protect the interests of Americans, the integrity in commerce and the future of the country.
Why would you advocate for a system that empowers Zuckerberg, Dorsey, the Google faggots and Bezos to become the arbiters of information in America…why not just allow them to choose our elected officials as well?

 

[dblack]

You have to consider scale bud…this shit isn’t complicated for anyone even half sane…

Ok, so only large businesses should be required to treat everyone equally? How large?

Think down the lines of antitrust laws and regulations and how they’re supposed to work to protect the interests of Americans and the future of the country.

Nah, most of those are bullshit too.

Why would you advocate for a system that empowers Zuckerberg, Dorsey, the Google faggots and Bezos to become the arbiters of information in America…why not just allow them to choose our elected officials as well?

They are not "arbiters of information". They run a fucking website. The idea that they control you is paranoid delusion. Or, rather, a convenient excuse for a state power grab.

 

[dblack]

So now it's OK for a business to refuse service to someone if the customer doesn't conform to that businesses standards, ethics, morals, and even religious beliefs?

Well, that's the question of the poll. What do you think?

 

[Canon Shooter]

While I understand the intent, no, the government should be "forcing" businesses to treat customers equally.

I have customers who've been with me since I opened my doors. These are long term relationships on which I place a high value. Some of these clients enjoy certain perks; maybe lower rate financing or free shipping on an order, that a new account may not receive, and they'll get it just because they're a long standing client and I want to show them that I appreciate their business.

Now, with that said, I'm dealing in a line of products that I produce and sell. I don't deal in opinions or political affiliations I may or may not agree with. My choice to do business with someone is not, nor has it even been, dictated by someone's political views. In the case of something like Twitter or Facebook, I think it's far more important that there be a level playing field.

With my business, I can say "He ships for free because he's been a client since 2008" and that's easy to justify. But to say "We're going to take away his account access because we don't like what he says." is completely different. They're private companies and, as such, they can do what they want, but the optics are horrible. It smacks of censorship. It smacks of violating someone's rights. Even though it's probably neither of those from a legal standpoint, the legal standpoint isn't going to matter to someone who's already made their decision.

The only reason to keep someone off a social networking platform is fear...

 

[Rogue AI]

In another thread we were discussing what Trump and the Republicans are after with the lawsuit against Twitter, and their desire to "crack down" on social media.

bripat9643 offered the following:


I'm not calling out bri here, just wonder if that's a general consensus. Should we require businesses to treat everyone equally and impartially?

Social media gains protection from litigation by the government. In that sense social media should be held to a higher standard or lose those protections.

 

[dblack]

Social media gains protection from litigation by the government. In that sense social media should be held to a higher standard or lose those protections.

Before we get into the ad-hoc excuses, as a general principle, do you think all businesses should be required to treat everyone equally? Or just those that were mean to Trump?

 

[rightwinger]

In another thread we were discussing what Trump and the Republicans are after with the lawsuit against Twitter, and their desire to "crack down" on social media.

bripat9643 offered the following:


I'm not calling out bri here, just wondering if that's a general consensus. Should we require businesses to treat everyone equally and impartially?

Twitter has rules of conduct
So does USMB

If you can’t follow the rules, you get banned

 

[Rogue AI]

Before we get into the ad-hoc excuses, as a general principle, do you think all businesses should be required to treat everyone equally? Or just those that were mean to Trump?

Section 230 is not ad hoc.

 

[dblack]

Twitter has rules of conduct
So does USMB

If you can’t follow the rules, you get banned

You forgot to answer the poll. Do you have any opinions on the topic?

 

[dblack]

Section 230 is not ad hoc.

Then repeal it and stop using it as a cheap excuse to lord it over businesses who won't do what you want them to do.

 

[rightwinger]

You forgot to answer the poll. Do you have any opinions on the topic?

Internet polls are for retards

 

[surada]

In another thread we were discussing what Trump and the Republicans are after with the lawsuit against Twitter, and their desire to "crack down" on social media.

bripat9643 offered the following:


I'm not calling out bri here, just wondering if that's a general consensus. Should we require businesses to treat everyone equally and impartially?

Customers have to abide by terms of service.

 

[dblack]

Internet polls are for retards

And? You're gonna answer it then, right?

Are you ashamed of your position? Confused by the question? Just trolling for the halibut?

 

[dblack]

Customers have to abide by terms of service.

What do you think about the topic? Should all businesses be required to treat everyone equally and impartially?