Does no such thing exist?
Are there no people you'd consider somewhat radical who might be suggesting other policies for Biden?
Association of Flight Attendants calls for all those involved in yesterdays events of breaching the Capital Building to be banned from flying
- Thread starter Dwarvenhobble
- Start date
Are there no people you'd consider somewhat radical who might be suggesting other policies for Biden?
Dwarf, why do you quit replying to me every time I point out you’re trying to get people banned?
Or just repeal 230, a government protection that protects them from getting sued for user-based content on the basis that they're a "platform", not a "publisher".
That'd solve the problem real quick.
"Stoking the fire" is not a meaningful term. You don't have any facts or evidence to back up what you're saying, just vague, unfounded accusations. Come back when you have something real.
They would still have the prerogative of enforcing a terms of service which is not content-neutral. It would not "solve" any problem, just put your posting liberty at the mercy of tech executives. Is it your freedom or that of the owners of tech companies that you value?
You know you could have just politely pointed out I missed your reply rather than assuming malice right?
When I have abut 24 notifications from lots of people reply I do tend to not notice some.
So here we go
Why? Do you struggle to see people on the internet as real people? Or should it only happen IRL so people can be in range to start a brawl to shut the other down?
Weirdly rather harsh there. Contrary to what you seem to believe I bare you no ill will. I just hope you don't end up getting into something you end up being unable to gt out of quite so easily. I mean you did admit to going to some of the protests that turned into riots in the past over the summer.
Actually I wasn't. I wasn't trying to pull Trunkage's move here to get people to mention the other banned topic. Even since there have been people telling Houseman to fuck off or leave.
Also again we're meant to be leaving off the labels.
It would cause them to drop their mask. They'd have to actually act according to their ToS and either be fair to all, or reveal that they aren't being fair to all.
Those who don't like it will leave, and then real viable alternatives will be more than just a theoretical dream.
I dunno would be quite interesting to see the lawsuits flying even with the TOS because then the TOS would have to be enforced to the letter or it could be pointed out there was bias.
I will say I think reform is better than repeal with Section 230 as that would just allow the people with most money and litigious intent to control the things more.
A better move would be what the UK has that unless it's an illegal group your political association choices are protected somewhat legally. (though I think it may only be in employment).
Or a ruling that if you become the only viable / main platform you then have to act like a public service. That would also help stop some of the anti-competitive practices like buying up rivals etc to gut them.
Because everyone does. Also, yes. For a lot of people knowing that someone might punch them for saying fighting words is the only thing that stops them from saying them. Most probably.
I don’t care. If the police arrest me for being at a protest where somebody looted a Sprint store, I’ll have a good laugh then go on my way when they have no evidence I took anything (as I didn’t take anything).
Bullshit. You keep doing this. You keep bringing it up then shutting up if someone points it out. You genuinely care about the rules and regulations of a thrice bankrupted gaming web forum.
Maybe people shouldn’t be fascists.
Trump just wants 230 gone so that he can spend the rest of his life sacking social media platforms with libel suits for calling his lies lies.
Association of Flight Attendants calls for all those involved in yesterdays events of breaching the Capital Building to be banned from flying
Why do you think that? The question asked was whether "offensive online content is taken seriously" or not. The question clearly does not ask questions such as "should you ban this kind of speech". It should not be assumed as a proxy for it. Not quite. I mean, it's all there in black and...
forums.escapistmagazine.com
So online conversation is often more honest then.
I hope for your sake that's true.
No I keep pointing out it happened and we literally have a message up from Nick telling people to knock that crap off.
So you're equating Torchman with the most extreme elements of one side while other people argue no-one is doing that?
You really are undermining their argument you know that right?
I'll record this as valuing the liberty of tech executives rather than your own.
Yeh no that doesn't show me saying what you claimed.Association of Flight Attendants calls for all those involved in yesterdays events of breaching the Capital Building to be banned from flying
Why do you think that? The question asked was whether "offensive online content is taken seriously" or not. The question clearly does not ask questions such as "should you ban this kind of speech". It should not be assumed as a proxy for it. Not quite. I mean, it's all there in black and...
It shows me claiming people saying that are likely doing it to strawman one side.
Which is why I suspect you linked and didn't quote it
No it wasn't.
I just showed what I actually said there.
I'll chalk this up to some weird error your end where because it seems you can't actually quote me saying it now. Hell or even screenshot it.