re: Who owns this shite show?

quote:

---

Someone changed my written word.

I’m old. He’s old and bored.

We both believe in the United States Constitution.

Simple to me. Will keep me from being bored. No one has the right to change my words.

I’ll throw some money at that. I have to stand for something

---

Oh my God, what is it with ageing dudes that get fired up and lose their minds about the dumbest fricking shite imaginable, and try and frame everything as some kind of fight for freedom and rights.

Original poster, you don’t have the gumption nor the guile to cut through the solicitors and barristers that i shall provide chicken. I suggest taking a hike post haste.

I heard his lawyer was almost finished with the lawsuit but ran out of energy. Caregiver going to come over and give him a bath and then he’ll take a nap. Hopefully we get an update after that

Bad form to upvote your own post.

quote:

---

WalkonQB

---

Section 230 covers Chicken from any liability from anything posted here because the posts are individual opinions of posters aka information content providers.

Profanity on this site is scrubbed because of younger users. Legally TD isn’t liable to do any of it. It’s a free courtesy, probably so younger folks can enjoy the site while exercising their 1A Rights. Profanity has nothing to do with Child Privacy therefore doesn’t even touch COPPA.

quote:

---

The statute defines an “interactive computer service” as “any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server.” That includes websites, internet service providers, and web hosting services. It defines an “information content provider” as a person or entity responsible “for the creation or development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive computer service.” For instance, someone who writes a tweet and posts it on Twitter is acting as an information content provider. Say, for example, you run a blog with a comments section. Section 230 wouldn’t protect the content of the blog posts that you write. But it would protect you from liability for the comments left by your readers. (If, on the other hand, you substantially edited a reader’s comment and changed its meaning in a way that made it unlawful or legally actionable, you could lose Section 230 immunity for that comment.)

---

1. I doubt what you said that was edited falls into unlawful or reasonable legal action.

2. This is a private domain. You agreed to the Terms of Service and the User Agreement. How were these TD policies used in an unlawful or legally actionable way?

So, dawg baw, what did you say that was edited? What in the edit made it unlawful or legally actionable? If you're mad that your cussin' got you edited, then L.O.L.

Sounds like you committed the tort dawg baw.

Bawliography:
Section 230

TD ToS and UA

We await your brief “juris bawtorate”.