Current Events > House passes tic tok ban bill!

(+) Yeah! (+)

It appears he marked all of my posts and the best he got was a notification on one which I really wish I could dispute just to get explanation since the logic is kinda wild but also it only resulted in a notification anyway so I mean lol

FinalBraveNUT posted...

Finally a glimmer of hope for our children to go outside again!

Banning tiktok won't get children outside again.

Society has made outside hostile for people. 3rd places are largely gone as well. Not to mention children are barely allowed anywhere without an adult

ssb_yunglink2 posted...

Lmao posting while warned about the very thing he got warned for is risky business

I doubt he comes back until hes off probation

He got warned because he directly called people here dumb after getting heated, not because of his political argument.

Once again, I see more evidence of fandom's stance against politics. That guy was in a civil debate with you (one I was actually enjoying) until someone else randomly brought up topics he made from 2019 and 2020, basically 5 years ago. Then it became dogpile time about his character which derailed the entire topic. It's the same routine in almost every political topic.

Do children even have recess? I thought that was 'not productive' for future factory drones that they want them to be.

Also same political party who's trying to use the excuse "Kids are too addicted to thier phones!" (Which admittedly... isn't wrong) are also trying to say that kids don't need lunch at school.

Won't anyone think of the poor underaged car thieves?

Miquella posted...

He got warned because he directly called people here dumb after getting heated, not because of his political argument.

Once again, I see more evidence of fandom's stance against politics. That guy was in a civil debate with you (one I was actually enjoying) until someone else randomly brought up topics he made from 2019 and 2020, basically 5 years ago. Then it became dogpile time about his character which derailed the entire topic. It's the same routine in almost every political topic.

Oh hey P4wn4g3 what's up

Miquella posted...

Once again, I see more evidence of fandom's stance against politics.

You've been to the other social boards that used to sometimes discuss political issues?

Miquella posted...

He got warned because he directly called people here dumb after getting heated, not because of his political argument.

Once again, I see more evidence of fandom's stance against politics. That guy was in a civil debate with you (one I was actually enjoying) until someone else randomly brought up topics he made from 2019 and 2020, basically 5 years ago. Then it became dogpile time about his character which derailed the entire topic. It's the same routine in almost every political topic.

If he owned up to his posts then nothing wouldve happened. Instead, he chose to deny it, double down on that denial, and then pretend the evidence was fake.

I cant feel sorry for someone lying about something and then calling their own posts fake lmao

Dudebusters posted...

Oh hey P4wn4g3 what's up

You did the same thing in the emergency room/pregnant women topic. I really want to know why you do that? Not only do you derail the conversation, you're essentially trying to blacklist users from participating here.

ssb_yunglink2 posted...

If he owned up to his posts then nothing wouldve happened. Instead, he chose to deny it, double down on that denial, and then pretend the evidence was fake.

I cant feel sorry for someone lying about something and then calling their own posts fake lmao

Those posts were from 2019. Do you remember posts you made in 2019? That's besides the point, thoughwhat does any of that have to do with a tiktok ban being passed by the house?

Miquella posted...

You did the same thing in the emergency room/pregnant women topic. I really want to know why you do that? Not only do you derail the conversation, you're essentially trying to blacklist users from participating here.

The way I see it, he's exposing shitposters so people don't waste their time engaging in meaningful topics. Knowing that saves them the effort. That's doing people here a solid.

Miquella posted...

You did the same thing in the emergency room/pregnant women topic. I really want to know why you do that? Not only do you derail the conversation, you're essentially trying to blacklist users from participating here.

You sure seem to be paying a lot of attention to me. I wonder why? Couldn't be because you're an alt of somebody I've called out before, right? Naaaah.

rideshort posted...

The way I see it, he's exposing shitposters so people don't waste their time engaging in meaningful topics. Knowing that saves them the effort. That's doing people here a solid.

This. My intention isn't to derail topics, it's to stop topics from being derailed for too long by people engaging with known shitposters without knowing it. If people decide to engage with a shitposter once I reveal them as a shitposter, that's their perogative, but they deserve to know and make that choice themself.

Miquella posted...

Those posts were from 2019. Do you remember posts you made in 2019? That's besides the point, thoughwhat does any of that have to do with a tiktok ban being passed by the house?

im sure ive made stupid posts in the past. I wouldnt deny reality if i was staring at such posts tho

rideshort posted...

The way I see it, he's exposing shitposters so people don't waste their time engaging in meaningful topics. Knowing that saves them the effort. That's doing people here a solid.

Except he wasn't shitposting. He was engaged in a political topic and had an interesting stance and civil argument with ssb_yunglink2 before someone came at him out of nowhere with "You said this unrelated thing 5 years ago." Then the topic was derailed, which is the only reason I'm even saying something.

Dudebusters posted...

You sure seem to be paying a lot of attention to me. I wonder why? Couldn't be because you're an alt of somebody I've called out before, right? Naaaah.

You're the main one I see who keeps derailing these topics. Just let the arguments unfold for those of us who like to actually watch meaningful debates, not character attacks.

His stance was "China bad". I wouldn't call that interesting in the least.

Miquella posted...

had an interesting stance

lmao no he didn't, he has a generic as fuck right wing stance which is why he got called out in the first place for being a generic as fuck troll

Sorry that made you mad I guess?

Miquella posted...

Those posts were from 2019. Do you remember posts you made in 2019? That's besides the point, thoughwhat does any of that have to do with a tiktok ban being passed by the house?

"How dare people show others thier lies!"

It is hard to have an honest discussion with a dishonest man.

Here is a very easy solution if someone is confronted by something stupid they did don't deny it than accuse the person of being a liar. Just own up to it and apologize or stand by it.

Honesty is the best policy.

Miquella posted...

Those posts were from 2019. Do you remember posts you made in 2019? That's besides the point, thoughwhat does any of that have to do with a tiktok ban being passed by the house?

Tell me, did he say he couldn't remember or did he accuse someone of making a fake website and framing him?
One of those is very dishonest.

Miquella posted...

You're the main one I see who keeps derailing these topics. Just let the arguments unfold for those of us who like to actually watch meaningful debates, not character attacks.

You have derailed the topic so you could bitch about someone exposing another user for being a liar.
Always angry at the honest ones but never the liars, why?

havean776 posted...

Tell me, did he say he couldn't remember or did he accuse someone of making a fake website and framing him?
One of those is very dishonest.

Also this. He didn't say "I don't remember," he accused me of lying, slander, and straight up creating a fake website.

And now you, Miquella, are getting on my case for proving what I said to refute his accusations.

Why?

Well anyways, it's nice that Ukraine is getting more aid. Republicans were trying to put an end to that

Miquella posted...

You did the same thing in the emergency room/pregnant women topic. I really want to know why you do that? Not only do you derail the conversation, you're essentially trying to blacklist users from participating here.

Literally all you've done since showing up here is shit post about how badly CE treats outsiders and that Fandom is justified in what they're doing to CE. Is it not embarrassing to act like this? Cause I'd be fucking embarrassed

You'd think these people who totally aren't trolling would wise up, especially with the new rules.

Umbreon posted...

Well anyways, it's nice that Ukraine is getting more aid. Republicans were trying to put an end to that

This is a great takeaway and I'll bow out of the topic with this.

Gwynevere posted...

Literally all you've done since showing up here is shit post about how badly CE treats outsiders and that Fandom is justified in what they're doing to CE. Is it not embarrassing to act like this? Cause I'd be fucking embarrassed

One would think if he was acutally interested in discussion he would engage in it. Instead the only thing I ever see him do is get angry at people for having a memory.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Yes, even if you don't like Tic tok you shouldn't support it being banned.

This should fund Ukraine till Sept of 2025 so no more crap from traitorous Republicans

Miquella posted...

He got warned because he directly called people here dumb after getting heated, not because of his political argument.

Once again, I see more evidence of fandom's stance against politics. That guy was in a civil debate with you (one I was actually enjoying) until someone else randomly brought up topics he made from 2019 and 2020, basically 5 years ago. Then it became dogpile time about his character which derailed the entire topic. It's the same routine in almost every political topic.

?
This has nothing to do with Fandom's politics rules. We've been trying to crackdown on dogpiling and ad hominems since last August, at the latest. Can't really do anything if people respond by flaming instead of marking posts. Also can't help if people remember previous posts.

Anyway, was this still part of the big government surveillence/Internet censorship bill, or was that split?

Dudebusters posted...

lmao no he didn't, he has a generic as fuck right wing stance which is why he got called out in the first place for being a generic as fuck troll

Sorry that made you mad I guess?

I'm not mad. Just disappointed that we won't see the conclusion of the actual topic argument between those two. And not because he was warned but because ssb_yunglink2 decided not to engage any further after you interfered.

If he was overtly trolling and you intervened, I would understand. But the guy was simply arguing his stance on the topic at hand.

ssb_yunglink2 posted...

I hope everyone supporting this understands the precedent this sets.

Another win for the nanny state

None whatsoever. Because a bill is not a law.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

It has more to do with the old guard seeing that Israel is no longer beloved in America and they want to ban one of the many reasons it's not.

Bill Maher just went on a tirade last night about college students supporting Hamas because they want a ceasefire. That's basically where the establishment is. People don't worship Israel anymore like they did in the 40-00s, and as the information age drags on, fewer and fewer will support them.

I understand why the US supports Israel unconditionally, but I also don't have to approve of it. As these college aged kids get older, that support will continue to diminish as they start to get into holding office, and eventually, Israel is going to have to either have a rude awakening or the US will simply abandon them.

Basically the media and politicians want to hold onto hope, but you won't be able to put the toothpaste back into the tube.

divot1338 posted...

None whatsoever. Because a bill is not a law.

supporting the bill. They want it to become law. Why are you playing semantics with such an obvious statement

Baphometa posted...

We've been trying to crackdown on dogpiling and ad hominems since last August, at the latest.

Doesn't seem like there's been much progress with that.

Miquella posted...

If he was overtly trolling and you intervened, I would understand. But the guy was simply arguing his stance on the topic at hand.

He was overtly trolling, which is why he couldn't defend his stance beyond "China bad." I then revealed that, yes, he has a history of overtly trolling. And then people did with that information as they chose to do.

Sorry that upsets you.

Miquella posted...

I'm not mad. Just disappointed that we won't see the conclusion of the actual topic argument between those two. And not because he was warned but because ssb_yunglink2 decided not to engage any further after you interfered.

If he was overtly trolling and you intervened, I would understand. But the guy was simply arguing his stance on the topic at hand.

We werent going to get anywhere with that argument either way. He was entirely fixated on CHINA BAD and wasnt listening to anything i said

Miquella posted...

Doesn't seem like there's been much progress with that.

I like how you purposely didn't quote the rest of their post

Miquella posted...

I'm not mad. Just disappointed that we won't see the conclusion of the actual topic argument between those two. And not because he was warned but because ssb_yunglink2 decided not to engage any further after you interfered.

If he was overtly trolling and you intervened, I would understand. But the guy was simply arguing his stance on the topic at hand.

You could always join the discussion and tell us your stance.
I know you won't because you have no care for the topic but you could.

Miquella posted...

Doesn't seem like there's been much progress with that.

Dude didn't get dogpiled though. He said some out of pocket shit, lied about it, and people responded to that. How many people do you think should be allowed to respond to a post to prevent dogpiling?

Miquella posted...

Except he wasn't shitposting. He was engaged in a political topic and had an interesting stance and civil argument with ssb_yunglink2 before someone came at him out of nowhere with "You said this unrelated thing 5 years ago." Then the topic was derailed, which is the only reason I'm even saying something.

Shitposting or not is irrelevant. Knowledge of knowing he/she is a shitposter is what mattered. Now whether or not anyone chooses to engage, that's their prerogative.

Honestly all that person had to do what just simply man up and take accountability of what was said. Then it would've been all good.

Now are you going to continue to rag on about this or actually contribute to this thread's topic?

hockeybabe89 posted...

imo government-mandated censorship is bad

This.

Gamefaqs posters are out of touch with their unfounded hatred towards a social media app that can be easily replaced by the next similar thing. Does no one remember Vine?

In fact, it possibly could be too late, YouTube shorts already exist and are almost identical. A bunch of creators that are on TikTok are already on YouTube shorts. Just what we need is YouTube to have a bigger Monopoly on visual media.

havean776 posted...

You could always join the discussion and tell us your stance.
I know you won't because you have no care for the topic but you could.

I do, actually. I have always been against tiktok being banned but mostly for personal reasons. My sister is a tiktok influencer and receives makeup products that she has to promote and advertise over tiktok.

I'm not good at formulating political arguments, which is why I prefer to watch other people debate.

Miquella posted...

I do, actually. I have always been against tiktok being banned but mostly for personal reasons. My sister is a tiktok influencer and receives makeup products that she has to promote and advertise over tiktok.

I'm not good at formulating political arguments, which is why I prefer to watch other people debate.

Just engage and you can get better as you go. I'm always curious to see other stances.

Miquella posted...

I do, actually. I have always been against tiktok being banned but mostly for personal reasons. My sister is a tiktok influencer and receives makeup products that she has to promote and advertise over tiktok.

I'm not good at formulating political arguments, which is why I prefer to watch other people debate.

If your sister was not on Tic Tok would you care about this bill?
To me it sets a bad precedent. Not only is it a vague reason to ban something but it feels like it was proposed by people that don't even understand the apeal of social media. Having people like that make decisions that could affect the lives of millions is not a good feeling.

You don't need to formulate your stance, you just say how you feel.

I don't think it's okay for the government to control who owns what, because once you open this can of worms what's to stop anyone from being forced to sell their company? This feels like something russia or China does.

What's to stop the next congress from forcing Twitter to sell, or audi, or BP.

Regardless, this is unquestionably bad because it's just nanny state nonsense masquerading as "national security" backed up with little aside from "China bad", while US based social media companies farm unlimited amounts of data stored on servers that routinely suffer from data breaches

You have too many people in Congress who are just out of touch with how the current reality is and these are people who are supposed to represent the people of their districts or states. There can be regulation on social media, but an out right ban on Tik Tok is too much. Look at how prohibition went.

Whoa. Topic rose by a hundred posts since I started to watch the T wolves game. What's going on ?

rideshort posted...

Just engage and you can get better as you go. I'm always curious to see other stances.

I guess I can try.

havean776 posted...

If your sister was not on Tic Tok would you care about this bill?
To me it sets a bad precedent. Not only is it a vague reason to ban something but it feels like it was proposed by people that don't even understand the apeal of social media. Having people like that make decisions that could affect the lives of millions is not a good feeling.

Yes, I'd still care about the bill. I don't want to lean into whataboutism, but it makes me worried about what could be next in terms of banning social media with the excuse of "it's a threat." I do think it leans into censorship.

(Disregard that deleted post if the arguing has concluded)