Judge tears apart Texas social media law for violating First Amendment

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Durandal, Dec 2, 2021.

  1. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you don't understand how Trump used his NDA's, really?
     
  2. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,280
    Likes Received:
    18,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Protecting a company that removes Donald Trump but doesn't remove child pornography or isis accounts. Was probably never in the scope of 230
     
    drluggit likes this.
  3. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Paler
     
    Polydectes likes this.
  4. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's not in the scope of normal practice for Twitter, Facebook, et al, either, who routinely remove literally billions of cases of objectionable content a year, ISIS and so forth included.
     
  5. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,990
    Likes Received:
    28,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am fully aware. You don't seem to understand the difference between an NDA and a EULA... Perhaps you misspoke.
     
  6. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,280
    Likes Received:
    18,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If you look close enough you'll find isis profiles that have been on there since 2013.

    Don't lie to me. We all know they're removing people and stories and information because of political viewpoint. I don't take issue with this if they don't have 230 protection, because the New York times doesn't.
     
  7. clennan

    clennan Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Don't lie? You don't accuse people of lying, and you certainly don't do it before they've even said anything! Jeez.

    We all know? Who's that? You and your fellow conspiracy theorists? Even then, speak for yourself, not what what you imagine others think.

    And clearly you remain confused about 230, and when it is and is not required for "protection" when deciding what will or will not be included on a website.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2021
  8. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,280
    Likes Received:
    18,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Or do it all you want and prepare to have your desires go unfulfilled because I don't believe you.

    The reason why is I know better.
     
  9. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    16,924
    Likes Received:
    13,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    A monopoly requires a barrier to entry.

    at one point, MySpace was the place to be and FB had one user.
     
  10. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    16,924
    Likes Received:
    13,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I did a test once, for a few weeks. I copied every post from friends claiming it would be taken down. It didn’t matter what; “share this American flag before FB takes it down!”

    Those posts were never taken down.

    You really don’t want the government in the business of telling businesses what they can’t do. Would you prefer a PF that is government controlled? That’s what some of you seem to be asking for.

    on my cruise forum, people posting nonsense about vaccines being mind control devices get their posts removed. I like it that the cruise forum is limited to discussing cruising. I want it to stay that way.
     
  11. Curious Always

    Curious Always Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    16,924
    Likes Received:
    13,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I’ve been kicked off of several forums for not being in compliance. I got kicked off of both Limbaugh’s and Hannity’s forum for disagreeing too many times. This was many years ago when I will still mostly voting Republican. I got kicked off the freedom project (or whatever they are called,) for complaining that someone posted another user’s home address.

    their house, their rules.
     
  12. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would be careful of any EULA on a trump sight before agreeing to it
     
  13. omni

    omni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2021
    Messages:
    6,050
    Likes Received:
    5,406
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Parler was kicked off servers. No one stopped them from hosting their own servers.

    This was brought up when it happened. Some people thought private companies should be forced to do business with other companies even if they don't want to.
     
  14. StillBlue

    StillBlue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    13,006
    Likes Received:
    14,654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "The social network on Thursday published a blog post detailing the highlights from its 12th biannual Twitter Transparency Report, where it reveals information about accounts it’s removed, inquiries from governments, and data requests. In that post, Twitter revealed that it removed nearly 275,000 terrorist accounts between July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017. While that was down 8.4% compared to the prior period, the company revealed that it has now banned more than 1.2 million terrorist accounts from its service since August 2015"
    This is from Forbes in 2018. Your point is grossly in error and I have to conclude you are listening to people with a political agenda and no interest in truth.
     
  15. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,280
    Likes Received:
    18,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not going to trust Twitter they are liars.

    I watch them live openly to Joe Rogan and Tim Pool.
     
  16. StillBlue

    StillBlue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    13,006
    Likes Received:
    14,654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because you don't trust them we are to not believe anything they report, itemized, detailed. to the government. Yet we should trust you? An anonymous, extremist, cultist? Yes cultist. When you believe someone without any actual evidence, that their teachings are indeed fact, by definition that makes you a cultist.
     
  17. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,280
    Likes Received:
    18,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No because they are confirmed liars.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2021
  18. StillBlue

    StillBlue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    13,006
    Likes Received:
    14,654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I've lied before, but not here unless in jest and mockery and obviously a lie. Does that mean that everything I say must be a lie? I would hope you'd say of course not. Pretty much all businesses, politicians and people have lied, most repeatedly, but that does not mean or even imply that everything that they say are lies. You look at them, scrutinize and decide if something is a lie or perhaps true. In this case I go with their detailed report as likely to be true. Do they catch all Islamic terrorists? No, of course not, most of what they do catch is in English so many sites get missed for the simple reason they have no one that understands their site. Even if in English they will miss many sites because no one reports them. They have billions of users, literally, they cannot possibly monitor them all. T****'s page was chock full of lies to the point where something true was difficult to find and it became a source for transmitting lies from other's. They were right to shut his page down, it was viewed by millions who seemed incapable or unwilling to scrutinize for truth. His site needed to be shut down for the harm he caused.
     
  19. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,280
    Likes Received:
    18,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You're not a Twitter CEO asking me trust them.
     
  20. HockeyDad

    HockeyDad Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2019
    Messages:
    5,267
    Likes Received:
    6,855
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well we know who kicked Dorsey out of Twitter and brought in the new over the top censorship. Paul Singer. This scum is the top funder of Senate Republicans. This is why we rarely if ever see Republican senators standing up for us in the culture war. They are bought and paid commodities of woke capitalists. Woke capitalists are funding both sides of the political aisle. Who believes anything will ever be done about censorship when BOTH sides support it?

    Paul Singer has got billions in bailouts under Obama for Delphi (which he had just purchased). He then used those funds to move Delphi jobs to Asia (cut American plants down from 29 to 4) and eliminated their pensions. And this is the person ultimately behind Twitter's new censorship. Do you really want to support a globalist welfare capitalist Republican donor (responsible for the loss of tens of thousands of middle class jobs), controlling speech on Twitter? Really? The man is the very definition of crony capitalist. He has done massive harm to working class Americans for his own financial gain while accepting billions in taxpayer bailouts.

    By the way, the information provided in this post is the exact kind of information that Singer is interested in banning on Twitter. DO NOT CRITICIZE OR EXPOSE THE ELITE.... amirite?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Singer_(businessman)
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2021
  21. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,990
    Likes Received:
    28,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I bet you're this cautious with your FB or Insta et al associations, huh..... I would expect that you're vastly more likely to suffer real world effects from having associations with those platforms. But you should read or maybe have a lawyer read the EULA and explain it to you so you understand your rights and what you're freely giving to any online presence when you sign up for them.
     
  22. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you should be careful of any EULA, but a Trump EULA I would be extra careful of based on his past NDA's
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2021
    StillBlue likes this.
  23. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,990
    Likes Received:
    28,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hmm.. seems that several of the states have taken issues with these private companies who've decided wokeness is the cure. Ask least 11 states are actively informing folks like Chase, Morgan Stanley et al that their decisions to "not to business with Oil and Gas) have the consequence of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of state pension and equity funds being removed from these banks. it sounds like the banks are going to cave given the amounts these states are likely to move should they not. All in all, a great example of how a market works.
     
  24. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,990
    Likes Received:
    28,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Twitter doesn't seem to care when it's a terrorist public figure. So, while they may have removed accounts and labeled them "terrorists", a whole bunch of real terrorists still actively post on Twitter. Hamas. just an example.
     
  25. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,990
    Likes Received:
    28,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And this is the kernel of your position. You still actively believe that Twitter can actively editorialize who their user base is. And yet, you're still unwilling to take away their 230 protections. You still don't seem to recognize the vileness of how folks, like Twitter and FB used their platforms to attack and interfere with a presidential election, but you were ok with that. You assert that you know what truth is, and yet I don't ever see you complaining about the active lies from folks in the Biden administration. Where are you posts attacking the lies from them? Balance is a funny thing. When you cannot see beyond the blinders, it's hard to retain your balance.
     
    FatBack likes this.

Share This Page