- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:30 pm to bamarep
quote:
If they're a "public forum" then how the frick can they decide who gets to talk and who doesn't?
Twitter, as a whole, is not a public forum. Trump, by using his twitter account as a forum for Presidential communication, created a public forum specific to his account.
Also, it should be noted that the ruling did not come with an injunction requiring Trump to unblock users. Instead it was “declaratory relief”.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:30 pm to slackster
quote:
Pretty sure that decision was specific to government entities on Twitter IIRC.
When tweeting during personal time, how are his tweets part of a public entity?
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:31 pm to Green Chili Tiger
quote:
Twitter, as a whole, is not a public forum.
The judge says otherwise. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:32 pm to slackster
quote:
Yes, but that judge ruled he uses his personal one for POTUS business.
Did she provide examples to substantiate that ridiculous claim?
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:32 pm to Dale51
quote:
When tweeting during personal time, how are his tweets part of a public entity?
But he mixes personal and governmental business on his personal account. That's the premise for the ruling.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:34 pm to Dale51
quote:
Did she provide examples to substantiate that ridiculous claim?
It was a pretty hit topic here when it happened a few months ago. I'd imagine there were examples.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:35 pm to bamarep
quote:
The judge says otherwise. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
The judge did not say otherwise actually. The snippet in the OP is intentionally misleading.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:36 pm to bamarep
quote:
The judge says otherwise.
No.
She didn't.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:36 pm to slackster
quote:
Twitter can do as they please, but government entities on Twitter cannot.
So any government "entity" cannot block anyone on Twitter?
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:36 pm to CptBengal
This actually has a lot more repercussions for Twitter than anyone else... including Trump.
This post was edited on 8/6/18 at 6:12 pm
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:38 pm to Dale51
quote:
So any government "entity" cannot block anyone on Twitter?
Trump hasn't unblocked anyone.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:38 pm to slackster
quote:
But he mixes personal and governmental business on his personal account.
So he can block anyone when not referring to "government business"?
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:39 pm to Dale51
quote:
So he can block anyone when not referring to "government business"?
Is he never going to use it for governmental business again?
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:40 pm to Green Chili Tiger
quote:
Twitter, as a whole, is not a public forum.
Why does this judge disagree?
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:40 pm to Green Chili Tiger
quote:
Trump hasn't unblocked anyone.
I wasn't referring to Trump.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:42 pm to CptBengal
Seems like Alex Jones could use that ruling to his advantage on FB and YouTube.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:42 pm to slackster
quote:
Is he never going to use it for governmental business again?
I don't understand what your point is supposed to be.
Posted on 8/6/18 at 5:43 pm to slackster
quote:
They ruled that Trump can decide who gets to see his tweets and who cannot. Twitter can do as they please, but government entities on Twitter cannot.
Why is this any different than Trump restricting the people in attendance at his speaking engagements?
Popular
Back to top



0






