Poll of the Day > Trump signs executive order targeting social media companies.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Sounds good to me.

helIy posted...

and if youre using the platform, you explicitly agreed to let them do whatever they want towards you.

This needs to be better regulated. It's actually stated in law that you can't agree to the terms of a contract that revoke your rights. A contract that does so is null and void.

---

I'm dying.

Afaik the post is still there, just with a note that he's lying basically.

How is leaving something viewable censorship?

zebatov posted...

It's actually stated in law that you can't agree to the terms of a contract that revoke your rights. A contract that does so is null and void.

you dont have the right to lie without being fact checked

---

I will say if Trump gets rid of Facebook the world would be better off, that is by far the site that allowed ads filled with inaccuracies that misled people heavily about Trump and Hillary before the election.

Fuck Zuckerberg and fuck his company for taking money from these assholes to put up completely misleading and 100% wrong ads.

Judgmenl posted...

You're scaring me.
There are like 5 people on GameFAQs who know my real name.

Now there are a lot more, apparently.

Yellow posted...

I literally just have you tagged as Robert and I forget how.

If you like I will delete the tag and forget your name in a day, but now a lot of other people know too because you made a big fuss about it

Yeah, but now a lot of other people have tagged him as it. The damage has been done!

Blighboy posted...

Zeus trying to pretend this is about anything other than the fact check label is just an atrocious take

Bligh pretending he understands anything -- including the word atrocious -- is a hilarious take.

Phantom_Nook posted... Trump acting faster on this than he did on the pandemic.

He's taken months or longer on this specifically, though, and years in general.

BlackScythe0 posted... Yes directly, DIRECTLY, assaulting freedom of speech is going to defend it.

Because BS0 believes social media platforms should have greater protections than fucking newspapers.Permitting lawsuits isn't "assaulting freedom of speech"

BlackScythe0 posted... the greatest assault of freedom of speech which has ever occurred in my life time, by far.

omfg, just stop. Your complaint is so far removed from reality that it wouldn't even qualify as hyperbole. And again, why should social media platforms have greater immunity than newspapers?

papercup posted... Again. It's not a bill. It's an executive order, and an extremely illegal one at that.

It's not illegal.


---

Zeus posted...

He's taken months or longer on this specifically, though, and years in general.

Twitter fact checking him happened this week, not months or years ago.

---

@zeus you really dont need to respond to damn near every post jfc

---

Phantom_Nook posted...

Twitter fact checking him happened this week, not months or years ago.

The fact-checking feature iirc has been around for months and his social media complaints go back years.

Mead posted...

@zeus you really dont need to respond to damn near every post jfc

@Mead You don't have to try to tag me in every post -- because I don't see mentions anyway as we discussed -- and, out of the 105 posts preceding mine, I only responded to *six* (both BS0's were the same post). And you don't need to try to hop on my lightning rod in every topic, bro

---

TheWorstPoster posted...

Ah yes, The sociopath who sent us into nuclear war with North Korea.

what timeline are you currently living in, there's no nuclear war, ok?

---

Luckily, the EC order amount to nothing.

---

Republican: the government is weak and bad, private all the way!
Republican when shit doesn't go their way: government do sth! Private entities is public entities!

Can Twitter grow a fucking spine and ban him already

---

When you ban your enemies they win.

---

papercup posted...

Can Twitter grow a fucking spine and ban him already

They make a shit ton of money off of his ToU-violating tweets.

It's basically click bait for them, but coming from the most powerful man in the free world, so magnified significantly in reach.

They don't want to lose that source of income, but have to present some token effort to show they don't endorse the horrible shit he says. It's a delicate tight rope the twitter execs walk, but it's for the sake of money, so it's worth it.

zebatov posted...

Sounds good to me.

This needs to be better regulated. It's actually stated in law that you can't agree to the terms of a contract that revoke your rights. A contract that does so is null and void.

literally none of trumps rights were affected.

and considering that even if they did delete his post, or edit it, or did anything to it, none of his rights would be violated then, either.

twitter is not a public forum. it is not part of the government. it is a private entity. the first amendment only applies to public spaces, and what the government can do to you. thats it.

---

papercup posted...

Can Twitter grow a fucking spine and ban him already

Ah, leftist cancel culture in full display.

---

OhhhJa posted...

This isn't hindering anyone's ability to question him mr. Melodramatic.

Hmmmmmm?

---

The_tall_midget posted...

Ah, leftist cancel culture in full display.

Or, you know, I'm just not psychotic like rightists.

---

papercup posted...

Or, you know, I'm just not psychotic like rightists.

You're openly calling for someone to be banned for having views you don't like.

Thank you for proving all of our points.

And a nice reminder that our fantastic mods would suspend you if you were a conservative poster who said the same thing to a leftist.

---

The_tall_midget posted...

for having views you don't like.

I think we've nailed down the point of confusion here

It's because you're a bad gimmick troll

---

I don't like being censored

*immediately censors others*

Wat

---

Im just going to leave this here

https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/violent-threats-glorification

March 2019
You may not threaten violence against an individual or a group of people. We also prohibit the glorification of violence.
Healthy conversation is only possible when people feel safe from abuse and dont resort to using violent language. For this reason, we have a policy against threatening violence on Twitter. We define violent threats as statements of an intent to kill or inflict serious physical harm on a specific person or group of people.

What is in violation of this policy?
Under this policy, you cant state an intention to inflict violence on a specific person or group of people. We define intent to include statements like I will, Im going to, or I plan to, as well as conditional statements like If you do X, I will. Violations of this policy include, but are not limited to:

• threatening to kill someone;
• threatening to sexually assault someone;
• threatening to seriously hurt someone and/or commit a other violent act that could lead to someones death or serious physical injury; and
• asking for or offering a financial reward in exchange for inflicting violence on a specific person or group of people.

What is not a violation of this policy?
We recognize that some people use violent language as part of hyperbolic speech or between friends, so we also allow some forms of violent speech where its clear that there is no abusive or violent intent, e.g., Ill kill you for sending me that plot spoiler!.
This policy is enforced in tandem with our policies on abusive behavior and hateful conduct. Statements that express a wish or hope that someone experiences physical harm, making vague or indirect threats, or threatening actions that are unlikely to cause serious or lasting injury are not actionable under this policy, but may be reviewed and actioned under those policies. Note: we also have a policy against encouraging self-harm and suicide.

Who can report violations of this policy?
Anyone can report potential violations of this policy, whether they have a Twitter account or not.

thedicemaster posted...

you know that technically "free speech" in US law isn't actually a right citizens have but rather a restriction the government has, right?
the free speech laws don't say you can say whatever you want, the laws say that the government can't stop you unless they have a very good reason.
Twitter is not a government agency, so they don't have to follow those laws.

But here's the trick to this...

Are the larger popular Social Media outlets a platform or a publisher?

If Twitter and Facebook are a publisher, then they can fall back on being a private corporation picking and choosing what they want on their websites. However, that is not what they are doing, they claim to be a platform where anyone can say anything (without implicating harm to others) using the rights of free speech as a basis....except that is not what they are doing. They flip-flop when an incident arises anyone threatens their ideology. It's only a platform until certain people put feelings over facts.

What the government is trying to do, if not in this case with Trump, is develop POPS laws (Privately Owned, Public Spaces laws) for the digital space, whereas even though they are privately owned platforms, the users will still have all the rights they would in the 'real world'. A good example of these kinds of laws is what happened during the "Occupy Wall-Street" protests, when all the protesters were camping in the parks along Wall St owned by "Wall-Street"; but because of POPS laws, the police couldn't remove them. And that's what people want for the internet....even as you say, the very restriction the government is placed under to protect free speech, would also apply to corporate spaces as well.

So IF Social Media outlets claims they are a platform, they would have to adhere to the same rights, privileges, and restrictions as normal everyday Americans have to; unfortunately nothing is written in stone, yet...... But again, they flip-flop when their backs are against the wall, falling on their rights as a "publisher" which then brings up several other issues....

What's is happening is one big game of "Push v. Shove" when the government is going to push Social Media's back to the wall and force them to identify as a either a publisher or a platform....

---

I took back my criticism, now I take back my take back on criticism.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1266387743996870656

230 protects free speech dumbass.

Someone fed this idea to him, I refuse to believe he came up with this scheme.

---

And what happens when sites can be sued for the content their users post?

They restrict you more. Or they implement some kind of government approved filter that takes the liability away from them.

Trump told his cabinet, "I'm really pissed off I got modded on Twitter, fucking mods", so his cabinet went, "yes Mr. Trump section 230 should be repealed that will solve the problem", and Trump went "tremendous" and that's how we cracked down on free speech in 2020.

---

I heard there was Tim Pool fans on this thread, here's the latest concerning this very topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvmbSSiTzGY

---

This is not a complicated issue and you can't bullshit away a cut and dry 2 word tweet with a half hour video.

Trump voters are the most delusional people I have ever met. And I've been to youth groups where women have burst out into tongues.

This is only serving to make me angrier and I have no idea how I can deconvert Trump supporters. If I just told the lady about 50 times that god wasn't real, she would eventually break, but Trump supporters... I have no idea. He's now saying we should honor the memory of the police brutality victim by shooting down the protesters. If gorillas could talk they would be wiser. I mean that.

Hey, anyone itt know how we get rid of all these fucking Republicans? Any ideas at all. Germany forced them away with religious prosecution from protestants. They are absolutely insane.

---

Yellow posted...

Hey, anyone itt know how we get rid of all these fucking Republicans? Any ideas at all. Germany forced them away with religious prosecution from protestants. They are absolutely insane.

Yes, you sound like a perfectly sane individual. Thank you for continuing to prove our points. What's even funnier is that our extremely unbiased mods believe that comments such as your are perfectly acceptable.

---

The_tall_midget posted...

Yes, you sound like a perfectly sane individual.

You need to get your ears checked. That's bad.

---

Big tech going down.

---

The_tall_midget posted...

Yes, you sound like a perfectly sane individual. Thank you for continuing to prove our points. What's even funnier is that our extremely unbiased mods believe that comments such as your are perfectly acceptable.

You cry a lot about these mods

Cacciato posted...

You cry a lot about these mods

Good, he should because the mods here suck.

---

Killer Mike went on TV and called Trump a dumb ass. TIME TO REGULATE THE NEWS NETWORKS. In fact, any form of technology that allows you to insult the god emperor must be destroyed.

---

Cacciato posted...

You cry a lot about these mods

You wouldn't because they protect complete assholes who actually do things that are against clearly written board rules. Try to guess who that includes?

---

lol @ TTM complaining about users breaking the rules while simultaneously insulting another user (which is against the rules)

---

I_Always_Die posted...

lol @ TTM complaining about users breaking the rules while simultaneously insulting another user (which is against the rules)

He's just mad that he gets modded for telling people they have a mental illness if they don't worship Trump.
---

The_tall_midget posted...

You wouldn't because they protect complete assholes who actually do things that are against clearly written board rules. Try to guess who that includes?

I guess you since you keep doing that

LOL. Considering the stupid shit I get modded for which aren't against the rules, I'll give you a small hint at who the oversensitive crybabies are.

---

Cacciato posted...

You cry a lot about these mods

he gets modded a lot for bigotry and racism

---

helIy posted...

he gets modded a lot for bigotry and racism

And yet, every single time, there is zero mention of anything racist, the mods makes assumption of racism and then suspends anyway.

But I leave that the usual ignorance and racist tendencies of certain people to make everything about race.

Some nobody

He's just mad that he gets modded for telling people they have a mental illness if they don't worship Trump.

I never do so such a thing since I believe that everyone are welcome to vote as they wish. The only people making posts about people being mentally ill for voting for the other side are lefties. We've had a very good example of that recently when one of your compatriots went full third Reich on such a comment, but as usual will not be moderated.

It's like you people are completely incapable of seeing that you're far worse than the people you denounce. Then you go to online platforms and circle jerks yourselves (see this thread) to try and convince yourselves that you're good people.

---

The_tall_midget posted...

It's like you people are completely incapable of seeing that you're far worse than the people you denounce.

careful, your irony is getting everywhere

You can cut it with a knife lol

---

The_tall_midget posted...

And yet, every single time, there is zero mention of anything racist, the mods makes assumption of racism and then suspends anyway.

its not me who is wrong, its them, despite me doing the same thing over and over!

sounds about right yeah

---

Mead posted...

you dont have the right to lie without being fact checked

Fact-checking is fine, but what happens when Twitter does so isnt.

#145 is correct.

---

Waaaaah Jack Dorsey can't openly shill anymore