Agree or be banned

[LiterateStylish 12,013]

That's what it comes down to, right now. 

Whether you agree with the bozo or not (and I think the numbers of those who agree are massively dwindling), it is NOT in your best interest, or the Countries best interest, to see him, or anyone else, banned from social media or technology sites.

If Hitler was alive during the era of Twitter, I feel that he even should NOT be banned.

Voices should be heard - even dangerous voices. Not muted in the hopes that they no longer believe what they believe. 

That's how columbine type shootings happen.

That's how undergrounds movements happen. 

That's how anger boils slowly until it bursts.

And the monopoly of the tech giants are growing stronger.

- Twitter bans Trump 

- Then Facebook

- Then Repubs run to Parlor

- But oops, Amazon bans Parlor

See the problem here?

It's not JUST about Trump.

You either agree with the tech elite, or you can not run a tech company.

Or talk on their platform. 

Even if you HATE Trump, you should abhor the actions to stifle speech - even if it is by a private company that technically has the right to do so. 

If you're a democrat, you should HATE the problem that this will cause AS MUCH as you hate Trump.

Just a few months ago, democrats were complaining about the monopoly of the tech giants: https://www.npr.org/2020/10/06/920882893/how-are-apple-amazon-facebook-google-monopolies-house-report-counts-the-ways

Now they are OK with it, since it serves their agenda.

Don't be a hypocrite.

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

2 minutes ago, LiterateStylish said:

That's what it comes down to, right now. 

Whether you agree with the bozo or not (and I think the numbers of those who agree are massively dwindling), it is NOT in your best interest, or the Countries best interest, to see him, or anyone else, banned from social media or technology sites.

If Hitler was alive during the era of Twitter, I feel that he even should NOT be banned.

Voices should be heard - even dangerous voices. Not muted in the hopes that they no longer believe what they believe. 

That's how columbine type shootings happen.

That's how undergrounds movements happen. 

That's how anger boils slowly until it bursts.

And the monopoly of the tech giants are growing stronger.

- Twitter bans Trump 

- Then Facebook

- Then Repubs run to Parlor

- But oops, Amazon bans Parlor

See the problem here?

It's not JUST about Trump.

You either agree with the tech elite, or you can not run a tech company.

Or talk on their platform. 

Even if you HATE Trump, you should abhor the actions to stifle speech - even if it is by a private company that technically has the right to do so. 

If you're a democrat, you should HATE the problem that this will cause AS MUCH as you hate Trump.

Just a few months ago, democrats were complaining about the monopoly of the tech giants: https://www.npr.org/2020/10/06/920882893/how-are-apple-amazon-facebook-google-monopolies-house-report-counts-the-ways

Now they are OK with it, since it serves their agenda.

Don't be a hypocrite.

Good post. Lit.  Censorship is wrong.  People are being censored. It needs to STOP.

[LIBills 1,240]

These people don't understand that every voice or person that gets shut down just makes the water boil a little closer to the top.

And when it boils over, they won't like the response these people will give.

When you keep taking away someone's and/or livelihood, there is only one way to respond.....

and that usually doesn't end well.

Silencing a person in every aspect of life leaves only one remaining response.

[Woody 15,675]

Twitter and Facebook are fucking around everywhere.  Uganda just banned Facebook from the country for interfering with their elections. 

 

 

 

[SackMan518 5,355]

These people forget that both free speech and tolerance are two way streets. Either you have it all or you don't have freedom of either. For all the talk about "If you don't like it then go build your own" what happens is when you actually DO build your own they try to infiltrate it or get it shut down and to me that doesn't adhere to free market principles. Having reconsidered what Big Tech did I don't actually think they should have the ability to remove non-criminal members since they are essentially a public forum and benefit from government protections. It's a huge problem to completely vaporize elected politicians from their platforms considering that these are used to communicate with their constituents for both policy and emergency information. 

So anyone on here celebrating the demise of apps like Parler (which is not from economic failure), you need to look at yourself in the mirror and come to terms with the fact that people like you are the cause of division, loss of liberty, and rise of oppressive regimes that you won't be happy with once they go full bore. I truly pity you.

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

2 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

These people forget that both free speech and tolerance are two way streets. Either you have it all or you don't have freedom of either. For all the talk about "If you don't like it then go build your own" what happens is when you actually DO build your own they try to infiltrate it or get it shut down and to me that doesn't adhere to free market principles. Having reconsidered what Big Tech did I don't actually think they should have the ability to remove non-criminal members since they are essentially a public forum and benefit from government protections. It's a huge problem to completely vaporize elected politicians from their platforms considering that these are used to communicate with their constituents for both policy and emergency information. 

So anyone on here celebrating the demise of apps like Parler (which is not from economic failure), you need to look at yourself in the mirror and come to terms with the fact that people like you are the cause of division, loss of liberty, and rise of oppressive regimes that you won't be happy with once they go full bore. I truly pity you.

230 has to go

[HipKat 78]

3 hours ago, LiterateStylish said:

 

Now they are OK with it, since it serves their agenda.

Don't be a hypocrite.

It's not "their agenda". It's certain groups spreading hate, lies and rhetoric, and making plans for organized operations against government bodies. If they don't put a stop to it, then they're going to be held legally (libel) for allowing a platform for these militant groups to organize illegal activities

[LiterateStylish 12,013]

36 minutes ago, HipKat said:

It's not "their agenda". It's certain groups spreading hate, lies and rhetoric, and making plans for organized operations against government bodies. If they don't put a stop to it, then they're going to be held legally (libel) for allowing a platform for these militant groups to organize illegal activities

Bull crap.

People have posted literal murders on social media and the companies are not held liable.

They’re only doing this because Democrats have control now. It’s clear as day.

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

43 minutes ago, HipKat said:

It's not "their agenda". It's certain groups spreading hate, lies and rhetoric, and making plans for organized operations against government bodies. If they don't put a stop to it, then they're going to be held legally (libel) for allowing a platform for these militant groups to organize illegal activities

Somebody just does not get it.

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

7 minutes ago, LiterateStylish said:

Bull crap.

People have posted literal murders on social media and the companies are not held liable.

They’re only doing this because Democrats have control now. It’s clear as day.

EXACTLY.  People saying anything else are spinning or lying.  Probably both.

[Meathead 72,142]

i despise the don and believe he should be held accountable for his numerous crimes, including inciting a mob to attack the capitol building and preparing to take congresspeople hostage and/or kill them

but i am complete against these lifetime bans

they should do it the way we do it here. every voice should be heard, no matter how offensive. if they cant demonstrate that their offensive content has some merit, then you warn them with specific instructions where they are violating the terms of use and are in danger of a temporary ban. if they persist with no effort to comply, then you temporarily ban them, escalate the length of the ban every time they continue to break the clearly defined rules, and ultimately consider a multi-year ban, with a chance to return if they mature out of it

at some point even someone as despicable as trump should be allowed back on these platforms. it serves no good to eliminate someone permanently, unless they exhibit a repeated pattern of not being able to follow the rules no matter how many chances you give them. those instances should be very rare

[Meathead 72,142]

34 minutes ago, LiterateStylish said:

They’re only doing this because Democrats have control now. It’s clear as day.

agreed. and its pathetic

this is why i only want dem control for two years, to get the ACA entrenched, and then go back to a divided gubmint where the checks and balances force the sides to work together

over the last decade+ even that hasnt worked. but you cant let either party hold total control for very long at all, preferably never, bc that always fucks things up. just give me a working health care system for everybody and get back to divided control as quick as possible

[LiterateStylish 12,013]

52 minutes ago, Meathead said:

i despise the don and believe he should be held accountable for his numerous crimes, including inciting a mob to attack the capitol building and preparing to take congresspeople hostage and/or kill them

but i am complete against these lifetime bans

they should do it the way we do it here. every voice should be heard, no matter how offensive. if they cant demonstrate that their offensive content has some merit, then you warn them with specific instructions where they are violating the terms of use and are in danger of a temporary ban. if they persist with no effort to comply, then you temporarily ban them, escalate the length of the ban every time they continue to break the clearly defined rules, and ultimately consider a multi-year ban, with a chance to return if they mature out of it

at some point even someone as despicable as trump should be allowed back on these platforms. it serves no good to eliminate someone permanently, unless they exhibit a repeated pattern of not being able to follow the rules no matter how many chances you give them. those instances should be very rare

Bingo.

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

53 minutes ago, Meathead said:

i despise the don and believe he should be held accountable for his numerous crimes, including inciting a mob to attack the capitol building and preparing to take congresspeople hostage and/or kill them

but i am complete against these lifetime bans

they should do it the way we do it here. every voice should be heard, no matter how offensive. if they cant demonstrate that their offensive content has some merit, then you warn them with specific instructions where they are violating the terms of use and are in danger of a temporary ban. if they persist with no effort to comply, then you temporarily ban them, escalate the length of the ban every time they continue to break the clearly defined rules, and ultimately consider a multi-year ban, with a chance to return if they mature out of it

at some point even someone as despicable as trump should be allowed back on these platforms. it serves no good to eliminate someone permanently, unless they exhibit a repeated pattern of not being able to follow the rules no matter how many chances you give them. those instances should be very rare

Big problem:  who makes the rules and who sets the standards?

[Nuke 27,156]

Well said Lit. Big tech has over stepped their bounds. They’re not just censoring “misinformation”. They’re censoring everything that doesn’t fit their agenda. A guy posted the video of Biden fighting with the worker over guns and Facebook deleted it. That fight happened, it wasn’t “misinformation”, yet Facebook  censored it. And this thought, by a lot of posters here, that it’s cool as long as they are not censoring my side is dangerous. 

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

1 minute ago, Nuke said:

Well said Lit. Big tech has over stepped their bounds. They’re not just censoring “misinformation”. They’re censoring everything that doesn’t fit their agenda. A guy posted the video of Biden fighting with the worker over guns and Facebook deleted it. That fight happened, it wasn’t “misinformation”, yet Facebook  censored it. And this thought, by a lot of posters here, that it’s cool as long as they are not censoring my side is dangerous. 

Exactamundo.  Good post.

[SackMan518 5,355]

2 minutes ago, Nuke said:

Well said Lit. Big tech has over stepped their bounds. They’re not just censoring “misinformation”. They’re censoring everything that doesn’t fit their agenda. A guy posted the video of Biden fighting with the worker over guns and Facebook deleted it. That fight happened, it wasn’t “misinformation”, yet Facebook  censored it. And this thought, by a lot of posters here, that it’s cool as long as they are not censoring my side is dangerous. 

This poem is still relevant decades later.

[HipKat 78]

1 hour ago, LiterateStylish said:

Bull crap.

People have posted literal murders on social media and the companies are not held liable.

They’re only doing this because Democrats have control now. It’s clear as day.

Maybe or maybe it's because they used that platform to stage the event that happened last week. 

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

I think Hip is scared of Lit.

[HipKat 78]

1 hour ago, Meathead said:

i despise the don and believe he should be held accountable for his numerous crimes, including inciting a mob to attack the capitol building and preparing to take congresspeople hostage and/or kill them

but i am complete against these lifetime bans

they should do it the way we do it here. every voice should be heard, no matter how offensive. if they cant demonstrate that their offensive content has some merit, then you warn them with specific instructions where they are violating the terms of use and are in danger of a temporary ban. if they persist with no effort to comply, then you temporarily ban them, escalate the length of the ban every time they continue to break the clearly defined rules, and ultimately consider a multi-year ban, with a chance to return if they mature out of it

at some point even someone as despicable as trump should be allowed back on these platforms. it serves no good to eliminate someone permanently, unless they exhibit a repeated pattern of not being able to follow the rules no matter how many chances you give them. those instances should be very rare

Why ban them at all?? Or if they keep doing it, eventually it turns into a lifetime ban, right? Well, Trump has been doing this shit for 5 years. Longer, really, going back to his attacks on Obama. So you're kind've contradicting yourself. 

Every voice should be heard, but if he/she breaks the TOS, they get a ban that gets longer and longer if they keep repeating the behavior. Does that sound about right?

[HipKat 78]

31 minutes ago, Nuke said:

Well said Lit. Big tech has over stepped their bounds. They’re not just censoring “misinformation”. They’re censoring everything that doesn’t fit their agenda.

Yeah, they are and so what? It's their fucking playground. They get to make their own rules and they get to decide who gets to play in it and who doesn't. Just like you do in your home/world. Just like I do, just like we all do.

[HipKat 78]

5 minutes ago, Thebowflexbody said:

I think Hip is scared of Lit.

What??

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

6 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Why ban them at all?? Or if they keep doing it, eventually it turns into a lifetime ban, right? Well, Trump has been doing this shit for 5 years. Longer, really, going back to his attacks on Obama. So you're kind've contradicting yourself. 

Every voice should be heard, but if he/she breaks the TOS, they get a ban that gets longer and longer if they keep repeating the behavior. Does that sound about right?

LOL

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

5 minutes ago, HipKat said:

What??

You seemed to be sucking up a little bit.  Just an observation.

[Thebowflexbody 2,377]

6 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Yeah, they are and so what? It's their fucking playground. They get to make their own rules and they get to decide who gets to play in it and who doesn't. Just like you do in your home/world. Just like I do, just like we all do.

Hip supports shutting down any voices that he disagrees with.  How nice.  Very American.