Board 8 > Republican House candidate proposes law against internet censorship

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/pnehlen/status/941370447278440448




In short, censorship of any lawful speech would be prohibited. Brilliant! If this is done, a large arm of globalist propaganda is cut off for good. Nobody would be able to stop those pesky "hate facts" that expose the globalist agenda as anti-human anymore.
---

You can count on Vlado to endorse such a blatant violation of property rights.

Literal fascism
---

With what grounds does America claim sovereignty over the internet and what I do with it from England?
---

KingButz posted...

You can count on Vlado to endorse such a blatant violation of property rights.

Literal fascism

You should look up "Marsh vs. Alabama".

Terastodon posted...

With what grounds does America claim sovereignty over the internet and what I do with it from England?

You push for your own country to enforce a similar law.
---

So tell me your thoughts on the trump administration censoring the cdc, you fake free speech advocate.
---

Get rid of getting Zucc'd.
It's a good thing.

It can affect any website that runs through the US as well through fines/embargos against US sectors of companies.

If it's expansive and enforced enough, it could affect say, the TOU here. E.G. certain stupid rules.
---

So much for the job creators, right?
---

Peace___Frog posted...

So tell me your thoughts on the trump administration censoring the cdc, you fake free speech advocate.

Imagine actually believing that not allowing the use of meaningless buzzwords in an official document by a government institution that is supposed to do serious work is "censorship."
---

Vlado posted...

meaningless buzzwords

We have a title for that Vlado biography.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Vlado posted...

meaningless buzzwords

We have a title for that Vlado biography.

lol
---

Vlado, that is the literal definition of censorship
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Vlado posted...

meaningless buzzwords

We have a title for that Vlado biography.

Incredible
---

Let's look at some things you can't be banned for under this law.
-Telling people to kill themselves
-Posting any sort of private images or information other than address and contact info
-Calling for genocides and assassinations (Not a credible threat of violence)
-Spamming shock images, provided they're not considered pornographic video
---

Peace___Frog posted...

TheRock1525 posted...

Vlado posted...

meaningless buzzwords

We have a title for that Vlado biography.

Incredible

this is why I click these topics
---

This blocks death threats, doxxing, and child porn. How can anti-SJWs possibly support it? That's so limiting
---

So under this law I can go on your blog, spam the comment sections of all the posts with demands that you kill yourself, and you can't ban me for it? Neat.
---

Funny how it just randomly has an exception for censoring sexual acts.
---

Grand Kirby posted...

Funny how it just randomly has an exception for censoring sexual acts.

the party of family values
---

Grand Kirby posted...

Funny how it just randomly has an exception for censoring sexual acts.

It'd have to.
Porn is illegal when shown to minors. (It's also not protected by the first)

Let's say this goes through without that provision, now a content delivery platform can't say "no porn".
...Content Delivery Platform now has to block all minors from viewership.
---

Everywhere on the internet would be a fucking nightmare if you could only ban people for literally breaking the law
---

So just to confirm, if this were to pass, I could tell Vlado to go kill himself and gamefaqs couldn't mod me for it?
---

Shaduln posted...

So just to confirm, if this were to pass, I could tell Vlado to go kill himself and gamefaqs couldn't mod me for it?

No because it arbitrarily only applies to sites with a high market share, presumably because they realized going any further is an even more insane violation of property rights.
---

It depends on how big a site needs to be to qualify as being a "major social media platform". It doesn't specify what the minimum threshold would be. If GameFAQs does qualify, we would not be able to delete that post nor ban your account. However, it sounds like we can restrict your account to one post and one topic a year as long as well tell you.that we are throttling your account.
---

Team Rocket Elite posted...

It depends on how big a site needs to be to qualify as being a "major social media platform". It doesn't specify what the minimum threshold would be. If GameFAQs does qualify, we would not be able to delete that post nor ban your account. However, it sounds like we can restrict your account to one post and one topic a year as long as well tell you.that we are throttling your account.

Thanks for the clarification
---

in this hypothetical future could I set up bots to spam any topic Vlado makes with giant pictures of George Soros?

is bot posting protected speech?
---

I wonder what Vlado would have said if a Democrat had proposed this exact same bill.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I wonder what Vlado would have said if a Democrat had proposed this exact same bill.

That theyre ruining our children because there would be nothing to stop them from being forced to read gay thoughts

Id say thats accurate since he supports television censorship for that reason
---

HashtagSEP posted...

That theyre ruining our children because there would be nothing to stop them from being forced to read gay thoughts

I expect that sort of thing to be argued as "pornographic" under this bill
---

I can't understand how anyone could see this topic, see Vlado defending the actual government censorship news that came out today just a few posts later, and still consider him a legitimate person with thoughts.
---

LapisLazuli posted...

I can't understand how anyone could see this topic, see Vlado defending the actual government censorship news that came out today just a few posts later, and still consider him a legitimate person with thoughts.

He is less robotic than Duckbear/Full Throttle, and somehow the latter isn't a bot.
---

Full throttle is far more interesting individual than vlado
---

Not_an_Owl posted...

So under this law I can go on your blog, spam the comment sections of all the posts with demands that you kill yourself, and you can't ban me for it? Neat.

It only applies to sites that have a large market share.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I wonder what Vlado would have said if a Democrat had proposed this exact same bill.

I would've still supported it. :) Remember, I like Gabbard and Sanders better than half the congress/senate republicans.
---

Yeah so Vlado's just personally going to censor you
---

Read this: http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/501/case.html
---

The verdict was that the state can't impose criminal punishment at the behest of a private entity that objects to speech on its property. The idea that the private property is for all intents and purposes a public space is perhaps comparable to major social networks, but is a ban in the digital space comparable to charging someone with the crime of trespassing? Also, if you're claiming Facebook or something as a public space, does it need to belong to the government?
---

paperwarior posted...

is a ban in the digital space comparable to charging someone with the crime of trespassing?

Yes.

paperwarior posted...

Also, if you're claiming Facebook or something as a public space, does it need to belong to the government?

No, but

Ownership does not always mean absolute dominion. The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it.

---

This law would never survive a Democratic filibuster anyway.
---

Vlado posted...

Imagine actually believing that not allowing the use of meaningless buzzwords in an official document by a government institution that is supposed to do serious work is "censorship."

pretty telling that you think "evidence-based" is a "meaningless buzzword."
---

In that case, the property owner sought the government's involvement, though. Here it's the government regulating all social media. I can't help but feel that Republicans would call it tyranny if they didn't think social media was out to get them.
---

Twitter's banning a bunch of alt right and literal Nazi people today

https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/942743173230682113?s=17

good stuff
---

Censorship that will only speed up twitter's demise. Twitter would already be up in flames if not for Trump. Soon enough, he'll move elsewhere, too...
---

The internet is censored so there's nowhere else he could move
---

trump's gonna start sending all his tweets out by carrier pigeon to every American's home
---

I did not expect from you to even pretend to protect the freedom of speech of your political opponents.

However, when the tide turns, do not expect from me to protect yours, either.
---

Vlado posted...

Censorship that will only speed up twitter's demise. Twitter would already be up in flames if not for Trump. Soon enough, he'll move elsewhere, too...

so how's voat/gab/8chan working out

lmao
---

Vlado posted...

I did not expect from you to even pretend to protect the freedom of speech of your political opponents.

However, when the tide turns, do not expect from me to protect yours, either.

wow sounds like you're a real spiteful hypocrite.

at least my positions are consistent that Twitter should be able to ban whoever they want for whatever.
---

Vlado posted...

However, when the tide turns, do not expect from me to protect yours, either.

The gamergate trump supporter who puts months of effort trying to get people fired or arrested or deported for saying simple facts isn't going to protect my freedom of speech? Oh noooo how will I ever survive
---

Yeah, I totally tried to get people arrested or whatever... There truly is no point in talking to you, you're doing nothing but fighting imaginary enemies and endlessly trying to convince yourself that the reality of your capabilities is different than it actually is.

Sad.

I'll still take the easy jabs when you leave yourself open like the CEO/presidential election brain fart, though. Can't reject an easy laugh.
---

Vlado posted...

There truly is no point in talking to you, you're doing nothing but fighting imaginary enemies and endlessly trying to convince yourself that the reality of your capabilities is different than it actually is.

vlado is so close to self-awareness
---

Almost every single Vlado post is projection of his own weaknesses onto others. He is already very self aware in that same, but he would never admit it.

For example, he KNOWS that he tried to get people arrested with #lockherup and the pizzagate stuff. That's not imaginary at all. So when he says I am fighting imaginary enemies, he is projecting his own imaginary enemies (emails, satanist pepperoni) onto me.

Same with the brain fart comment. Everyone knows that you CAN vote out CEOs. So him saying that you can't is obviously the brain fart, not me calling him out on his mistake. He knows no one thinks he came out on top in that exchange.
---