- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:49 pm to icheerforgeorgia
Religious freedom, arse butter muncher.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:49 pm to unotiger21
I'm against it. But just like with mandating masks for deadly pandemics, there is a time for censorship, too.
How many here were against the censorship our government used in WWII? How many would be in favor of censoring Hitler in Nazi Germany? It's interesting to see conservatives suddenly supportive of ACLU goals.
Having said that, I don't agree with everything I'm seeing, but I never do. Reality isn't as black and white as you guys try to make it out to be.
How many here were against the censorship our government used in WWII? How many would be in favor of censoring Hitler in Nazi Germany? It's interesting to see conservatives suddenly supportive of ACLU goals.
Having said that, I don't agree with everything I'm seeing, but I never do. Reality isn't as black and white as you guys try to make it out to be.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:49 pm to GeorgeWest
quote:
2. Private businesses have the right to have some rules about who their customers are.
Unless the customer wants a gay themed wedding cake.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:49 pm to chRxis
quote:
at OUR capitol building... how is that this is still being defended???
How can lifelong politicians still be defended?
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:49 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
JudgeHolden
I thought you weren't a Democrat?
It's OK, Hank does the same thing. You lawyers think it's all about you.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:51 pm to asurob1
quote:
The rules are the same for everyone.
Adorable
You could literally make up whatever the frick you wanted about collusion or Trump being an illegitimate President on twitter for the past 4 years.
Anything remotely questioning Biden's win was given a this is misinformation warning tag less than a week after the election.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:51 pm to unotiger21
I created a marked up excerpt of the Twitter TOS. The yellow and red highlighted parts are the relevant ones, with special emphasis on the sections highlighted in red. This is a pure contract law issue. Twitter has legal exposure if it does not enforce the provisions of its Terms of Service consistently across its user base.
Twitter TOS
Twitter TOS
This post was edited on 1/8/21 at 8:15 pm
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:52 pm to icheerforgeorgia
quote:
Private companies aren't legally allowed to explicitly deny service to protected groups. Donald Trump is not a protected group.
you don't law too good huh??
if said member of "protected group" explicitly breaks a bylaw/guideline/rule/etc., then yes, a private company, is FULLY within their right to deny service to that person...
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:52 pm to unotiger21
I think trump will still have a platform. I am less concerned about what Twitter or Facebook censors as I don’t consider them official sources of media and even less concerned with their censorship of the highest elected leaders in the world. If anything the situation seems embarrassing/ comical that the President of my country posts things so dumb that Twitter felt the need to ban his account despite the popularity he brought to the platform.
As a rule generally though I am against any form of censorship as I philosophically prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt that they can decipher truth from nonsense. However this forum does make me question that notion.
As a rule generally though I am against any form of censorship as I philosophically prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt that they can decipher truth from nonsense. However this forum does make me question that notion.
This post was edited on 1/8/21 at 7:57 pm
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:52 pm to asurob1
quote:
When I post on this or any other social media, website or forum, I agree to play by the rules that the owner of said social media, website or forum has laid out. When I violate said rules, or they decide they no longer want me to post on their site. They get to ban, suspend or expel me. They are private entities and they get to do whatever they want within the borders of their online playground.
Sure, but the rules aren’t applied anywhere close to evenly.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:52 pm to 93and99
quote:
You lawyers think it's all about you.
Everyone does. That is human nature. We care about ourselves. We are all inherently selfish. There is a reason sociopaths rise the ranks of politics so well.
There is also a reason why they stay in power.
But they will continue to use the media to keep us fighting amongst ourselves and we have leftist that continue to defend these life long leaches.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:53 pm to chRxis
quote:
bro, do you really care about Venezuela
We care about the equality of access to open platforms to share viewpoints. Something progs preach, but revel in their ability to deny.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:54 pm to asurob1
ASURob is exactly right.
People are foolish if they want the government to regulate social media. Trump wanted and now the democrats want it.
The only thing regulation does is limit competition. It becomes a barrier to entry.
I think Chicken could start twitter type business with the record he has.
(I damn sure am not a democrat.)
People are foolish if they want the government to regulate social media. Trump wanted and now the democrats want it.
The only thing regulation does is limit competition. It becomes a barrier to entry.
I think Chicken could start twitter type business with the record he has.
(I damn sure am not a democrat.)
This post was edited on 1/8/21 at 7:55 pm
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:55 pm to chRxis
quote:
oh lawd...
bro, do you really care about Venezuela, or do you just REALLY not understand that Twitter is a private company and choose what they deem acceptable or not?
just like you can deem whether you want to give them business or not... what's hard to understand about this...
Supposed moderate. fricking leftist trash is all you are
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:55 pm to chRxis
That's why I said "explicitly." As in, the cake company explicitly said they would not bake a cake for a same-sex couple.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:56 pm to Srobi14
quote:
f anything the situation seems embarrassing/ comical that the President of my country posts things so dumb that Twitter felt the need to ban his account
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:57 pm to JDGTiger
quote:
The only thing regulation does is limit competition. It becomes a barrier to entry.
Quick. Someone tell that other social media company that is being removed from everything
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:57 pm to tigerfan 64
If you think it's bad now, wait until Section 230 is repealed. When that happens, social media companies will be forced to censor.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 7:58 pm to Lynxrufus2012
Some people will claim ..they are a "private company" so they can do as they please...but they are not private. Once an IPO was held, it falls under public domain regulated by the SEC..try falsifying quarterly earnings. In addition, how do they transmit data? Private lines/towers/airways? Are these regulated by the FCC?
Page 5 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News