Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 76

Thread: This isn't politics - Better pay attention

  1. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    Publishers decide what content to print. Bookstores decide which books to carry. Both make a choice what material to disseminate.
    Yes, clearly bookstores don't have to sell every book that has ever existed, nor have I even came close to suggesting such a thing. My entire point is bookstores aren't held liable because they aren't editorializing what is sold in their stores, e.g. they aren't saying "We don't like Trump or Republicans so we are going to scan every book before we sell it to make sure Republicans aren't cast in a good light." If they started doing that chances are it would quickly hit the courts because at that point they are acting like publishers.

    Just go to Barnes & Nobles' website and search for "Trump", you'll get dozens of hits, some written by Trump himself, some written by others that are praising Trump, and some highly critical of Trump. They clearly aren't picking a side, they aren't acting like a publisher.

    I was about to make a comment like "Just because you can't find a copy of 'Mein Kampf' at Barnes and Noble doesn't mean they are acting like a publisher." But shit I checked their site and sure enough; you can buy 'Mein Kampf' at Barnes & Noble so really you're just making my point for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by drauz View Post
    Parler did the exact same thing, but of course you've forgotten about that because it was done the other way around.
    I haven't forgotten about it, I just don't care because the best way to go through life is to treat everyone by their own standards. The second you allow someone else to get away with double standards you might as well just give up.

    Quote Originally Posted by drauz View Post
    The truth comes out though, you're just mad that your god king Trump got banned.
    That's a weird take on what I said but aight.

    Like I have said at least half a dozen times so far: I am perfectly fine if Twitter and Google and Reddit and the rest want to act like publishers (that includes banning Trump and every single conservative if they want to) IF they have to play by the same publisher rules literally every other publisher has to play by.

    Remind me again why you're okay with these internet companies being granted special privileges? It's because you generally agree with their politics and their censorship rules right? Just admit it, you'll feel a lot better.
    Last edited by Tgo01; 04-19-2021 at 09:28 PM.

  2. #62

    Default

    What's insane to me watching the back and forth in this... people used to rail against being censored, about ANYONE being censored.

    It wasn't a right/left/moderate thing.. it was a "don't fuck with us" attitude that said let all people talk and express their ideas.

    Somehow in the past 10+ years that's shifted to acceptance of people being censored. It's regressive and pathetic to see it occur. It's sad to see people defend censorship.

    It's sad to see people with such distorted political ideologies now, that the fact I post an article arguing AGAINST censorship is somehow controversial. Sad fucking days are ahead.

  3. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaps View Post
    Somehow in the past 10+ years that's shifted to acceptance of people being censored. It's regressive and pathetic to see it occur. It's sad to see people defend censorship.
    It happened shortly after Trump ran for president. I'm not even joking. A year before that everyone on Reddit, Facebook, YouTube, etc were all against that one bill that was being floated around congress that would have supposedly censored the internet. Everyone was losing their shit over it. Everyone thought it was bullshit.

    Take a look at those sites now and it's full of Democrats demanding these sites and more censor every little thing they don't like.

  4. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    Everytime you're listening to Breitbart, Carlson, Mark Levin, etc, you're listening to content they assembled or wish to convey. You're not guaranteed an equal opportunity to hear contrarian views. In fact you listen to them because they make you little e-peen tingle.
    Isn't that the same for every.single."news".channel.ever?
    RETARD HALL OF FAME

    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    There will be no war when guns are more regulated.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ashliana View Post
    "I originally created an additional account back in the day to mess with the reputation system" Rep system came in 3 months later...
    Quote Originally Posted by Tsa`ah View Post
    Well tell that to the Naval hospital that issued a birth certificate labeled Ft Lejeune ... and then typed it in.
    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    3 million more popular votes. I'd say the numbers speak for themselves. Gerrymandering won for Trump.

  5. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran View Post
    Publishers decide what content to print. Bookstores decide which books to carry. Both make a choice what material to disseminate.
    Social media sites do the same exact things. They decide who to ban, who to shadowban, who to censor, who to "factcheck", etc...

    End the special protections they receive and let the free market / court system hash it out.
    RETARD HALL OF FAME

    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    There will be no war when guns are more regulated.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ashliana View Post
    "I originally created an additional account back in the day to mess with the reputation system" Rep system came in 3 months later...
    Quote Originally Posted by Tsa`ah View Post
    Well tell that to the Naval hospital that issued a birth certificate labeled Ft Lejeune ... and then typed it in.
    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    3 million more popular votes. I'd say the numbers speak for themselves. Gerrymandering won for Trump.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    PWC, VA
    Posts
    8,534
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgo01 View Post
    Remind me again why you're okay with these internet companies being granted special privileges? It's because you generally agree with their politics and their censorship rules right? Just admit it, you'll feel a lot better.
    Because the internet wouldn't be the internet without it. I don't want a shitty internet, I love the content on Youtube...twitter I really don't give a fuck about. The amount of petty lawsuits that would immediately get filed would be staggering. If you want more censoring then by all means, require Youtube to personally be liable for what is on their platform. I won't support it but I guess that's just me.
    No, I am not Drauz in game.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    PWC, VA
    Posts
    8,534
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaps View Post
    What's insane to me watching the back and forth in this... people used to rail against being censored, about ANYONE being censored.

    It wasn't a right/left/moderate thing.. it was a "don't fuck with us" attitude that said let all people talk and express their ideas.

    Somehow in the past 10+ years that's shifted to acceptance of people being censored. It's regressive and pathetic to see it occur. It's sad to see people defend censorship.

    It's sad to see people with such distorted political ideologies now, that the fact I post an article arguing AGAINST censorship is somehow controversial. Sad fucking days are ahead.
    Who are the people you feel were unjustly banned/censored from these platforms?
    No, I am not Drauz in game.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    PWC, VA
    Posts
    8,534
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~ View Post
    No dumbass, I and others want them to meet the same standard that others who have the protections as a medium have to meet. Don't edit content, don't change content and convey it without interference. You know, like the phone company, the mail, television and radio. The companies that transmit the message are not held responsible for the message as long as they don't control, manipulate or otherwise editorialize the message.

    I am perfectly FINE with letting Google, YouTube, Twitter and so on limit the message. As long as you remove their protections that specifically say they can't limit the message. Right now, they have their cake and get to eat it too acting as publishers and as mediums. You can't have it both ways while getting the protections that specifically say you can't have it both ways.

    Gods you Leftist hypocrites just won't see the facts and sooner or later, they WILL be coming for you too but since right now it's against the Right, you are ok with it.

    Robespierre’s Law – Power you give government to do unto others will be used to do unto you.
    I can't take you seriously when you compare the internet to the phone company and the fucking mail.

    Who am I kidding, I can't take you seriously anyways.
    No, I am not Drauz in game.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kekistan
    Posts
    6,807
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drauz View Post
    Who are the people you feel were unjustly banned/censored from these platforms?
    Though I agree with the private business argument. Blocking the leader of the free world on multiple platforms was an extremely stupid thing to do.


    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. ~ Marcus Aurelius
    “It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984

    “The urge to shout filthy words at the top of his voice was as strong as ever.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984

  10. #70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~ View Post
    Right now, they have their cake and get to eat it too acting as publishers and as mediums. You can't have it both ways while getting the protections that specifically say you can't have it both ways.
    Ah, the inevitable part of the discussion where you think your willful ignorance of what §230 says means anything other than you lying out of your ass. Since, y'know, you've been corrected on this issue before, but you just emotionally wish so gosh-darned badly that the law somehow included tests and restrictions on tech companies -- rather than being a simple transfer of liability for content from the company to their end users. I'm sure your misrepresentations are very convincing to the comically ill-informed, like Dreaven or Neveragain here, but alas, your suppositions aren't supported by either the plain text of the law, relevant case law, or expert legal analysis of the topic. Which, of course, you haven't read.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neveragain View Post
    Though I agree with the private business argument. Blocking the leader of the free world on multiple platforms was an extremely stupid thing to do.
    You're free to start your own alternative to Twitter, Facebook, etc. I'm sure it'll be as successful as Parler was or the MyPillow guy's "Free Speech, but no, not taking the Lord's name in vain, or..." site will be.

    And Trump wasn't the "leader of the free world," as you should've known when he started touting his generally stupid "America First" rhetoric. He damaged America's role in that regard by attacking the institutions that made America so by:

    • questioning whether we'd fulfil our treaty obligations to NATO if another signator were attacked
    • pulling out of the JCPOA that America signed in good faith (why would any other nation sign an agreement with us now giving up any concessions on their end, knowing there's a 4 year expiration date on any agreement?)
    • pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, effectively ceding ground in Asia to China
    • pulling out of the Paris accord for completely nonsensical reasons, as our participation was already completely optional and had no enforcement mechanism whatsoever
    • gutting the State Department, etc.

    Two seconds of cursory research would show you that Trump significantly reduced America's soft power. Even the UK's right-wing prime minister commented "America is unreservedly back as the leader of the free world and that is a fantastic thing" as Biden took over.
    Last edited by Ashliana; 04-20-2021 at 09:56 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •