|
|
01-08-2021, 09:50 PM
|
#16
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 7,139
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
I just deactivated my Twitter account.
I can only take so much totalitarianism.
|
Tell me, does PA practice totalitarianism? PA has banned many people. Why don't you claim totalitarianism when PA bans people? Neither Twitter nor PA are covered by the first amendment. That doesn't make either totalitarian.
|
|
|
01-08-2021, 10:09 PM
|
#17
|
PA Steward
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,813
|
Well, to be fair, he does say he can only take SO MUCH.
I obviously haven't found his tipping point yet. I'll keep at it!
|
|
|
01-08-2021, 10:18 PM
|
#18
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 4,907
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MargieRose
Twitter also deleted the #Walkaway account with all of its 500,000 followers.
Sieg Heil...comrade Twitter!
|
Correction...#Walkaway was banned from Facebook; however, I'm sure that Twitter will follow suit before long, anyway.
My opinion about Twitter stands and now includes Facebook, too. I'm glad that I quit both years ago.
|
|
|
01-08-2021, 11:20 PM
|
#19
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,664
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light
Tell me, does PA practice totalitarianism? PA has banned many people. Why don't you claim totalitarianism when PA bans people? Neither Twitter nor PA are covered by the first amendment. That doesn't make either totalitarian.
|
I'm an honest guy.
I'd prefer no one get banned unless they are abusive to other members, but no one has ever been abusive to me. I've had some heated debates. I've probably said a few things I'd rather take back, but mostly I think I'm respectful. Most people have been respectful to me and I can handle the occasional dig in the debates.
I don't read every thread and every post. So I don't know what promoted other bans. But I know "Pace" personally and I know he's a good guy and very reasonable. So if he banned some people it probably wasn't because of their opinions. It was more than that.
I resent twitter banning opinions. It's their right as a private company and it's my right to say adios and get my political news elsewhere and my horse racing news here. But it's totalitarian to ban opinions, prevent people from downloading certain APPs, take away their ability to accept payment for their opinions etc.. That's where the left is taking us.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
Last edited by classhandicapper; 01-08-2021 at 11:29 PM.
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 01:47 AM
|
#20
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,588
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
I'm an honest guy.
I'd prefer no one get banned unless they are abusive to other members, but no one has ever been abusive to me. I've had some heated debates. I've probably said a few things I'd rather take back, but mostly I think I'm respectful. Most people have been respectful to me and I can handle the occasional dig in the debates.
I don't read every thread and every post. So I don't know what promoted other bans. But I know "Pace" personally and I know he's a good guy and very reasonable. So if he banned some people it probably wasn't because of their opinions. It was more than that.
I resent twitter banning opinions. It's their right as a private company and it's my right to say adios and get my political news elsewhere and my horse racing news here. But it's totalitarian to ban opinions, prevent people from downloading certain APPs, take away their ability to accept payment for their opinions etc.. That's where the left is taking us.
|
As I recall it being said several times here in the past..."elections have consequences".
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 06:24 AM
|
#21
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,641
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJDave
Twitter permanently suspended President Trump’s account Friday after determining that his posts pose the “the risk of further incitement of violence.”
|
Google shared that they were removing Parler from their Play Store. Ditto Apple.
(If the FBI is even halfway on their game, they've probably already leveraged Parler to the tune of a couple of dozen informants).
While I'm not in favor of shutting down free speech, unfortunately, there are people who do not think carefully before they "discuss" things on the internet, and don't realize that there are just things you don't say. Unfortunately, many are not very savvy and end up in places they don't understand and become victims of intentionally controversial clickbait.
Apple and Google not wanting to support platforms and apps that include conspiracy theories, threats and hate speech, not to mention outright planning of violence, doesn't qualify as shutting down free speech. They aren't required to provide space for people to engage in that....They are private companies. They don't owe you anything.
So if you don't agree then find another platform to speak on and/or treat them as any other business that you will or won't do business with.
Twitter did supply an explanation in their blog about suspended account:
https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topic...uspension.html
Last edited by clicknow; 01-09-2021 at 06:34 AM.
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 06:31 AM
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,209
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
As I recall it being said several times here in the past..."elections have consequences".
|
So you’re okay with limiting the free speech of some people ? Serious Gus? You’ve posted a few stinkers last night and I know you’re better than that. You should be scared for your children’s future. This isn’t America anymore and throwaway lines like this WILL have consequences. We aren’t talking about building a wall anymore. We’re talking about ripping up the Constitution.
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 06:38 AM
|
#23
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,641
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6
So you’re okay with limiting the free speech of some people ?
|
Read my post above yours. No private company is required to host certain accounts and/or posts on their platform.
Unless you believe in taking away the rights of private companies?????
Anyone who feels strongly can create and host their own platform/forum/social media site.
That you fail to make this distinction, while claiming to be an owner of a business, has me scratching my head.
Last edited by clicknow; 01-09-2021 at 06:40 AM.
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 06:45 AM
|
#24
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,209
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by clicknow
Anyone who feels strongly can create and host their own platform/forum/social media site.
|
I guess you’ve fallen behind the news cycle. Google is now blocking access to websites they don’t agree with. Apple is now deleting access on their App Store to those they disagree with. Email providers are now blocking access to those they disagree with. Soon cable providers will block channels they disagree with. For a neutral observer like yourself that should scare the hell out of you.
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 07:01 AM
|
#25
|
Just Deplorable
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lebanon, Ohio
Posts: 8,088
|
My problem with all this is that the big platforms are cancelling people with the reason that those people are spreading lies, that Big Tech is the Ultimate Protector of the Truth, and we must abide by their Protection. I never voted for, nobody ever appointed them to decide what is real and what is not. Fact-checking is a joke.
I realize that they have policies against harassment and other personal threats and stuff like that (that don't get administered evenly, apparently), and there's nothing wrong with that. But I think it's foolish to compare behavior on a message board to platforms that can stifle the free flow of information.
But setting themselves up as the High Solons of Truthiness is way too Orwellian for me; especially since lies like Russia Russia Russia, Chancellorsville, and a dozen other tropes are still out there. Two plus two does not equal five, and I resent being othered if I refuse to accept that it does. And that is what is happening now to a big chunk of our population, and an even bigger chunk of the voting population.
It amazes me anyone can be all right with that. I can't believe that anyone can be so short-sighted as to not see where cancel culture meeting prior restraint leads to, and it's uncivil abridgement of our rights. And I'm not buying the argument that as private companies they can do what they want without regard to the First Amendment; that's not my point. My point is the next step, and the next step, and the next one......
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 08:31 AM
|
#26
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: donkeys ride from ASD
Posts: 13,002
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by clicknow
Google shared that they were removing Parler from their Play Store. Ditto Apple.
(If the FBI is even halfway on their game, they've probably already leveraged Parler to the tune of a couple of dozen informants).
While I'm not in favor of shutting down free speech, unfortunately, there are people who do not think carefully before they "discuss" things on the internet, and don't realize that there are just things you don't say. Unfortunately, many are not very savvy and end up in places they don't understand and become victims of intentionally controversial clickbait.
Apple and Google not wanting to support platforms and apps that include conspiracy theories, threats and hate speech, not to mention outright planning of violence, doesn't qualify as shutting down free speech. They aren't required to provide space for people to engage in that....They are private companies. They don't owe you anything.
So if you don't agree then find another platform to speak on and/or treat them as any other business that you will or won't do business with.
Twitter did supply an explanation in their blog about suspended account:
https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topic...uspension.html
|
For purely contextual reasons here are the tweets President Trump was banned for, very innocent taken word for word. But this ban is not about what in in the tweets it is meant as a ban on his followers, nothing more nothing less. Time to dust off your old G. Orwell book-1984 and give it a quick read into the future. trump-tweet-inauguration.jpg
__________________
'complicated business folks, complicated business.'
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 08:37 AM
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: donkeys ride from ASD
Posts: 13,002
|
trump-suit-3.png
They will cancel 75 million to get to 1.
__________________
'complicated business folks, complicated business.'
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 09:17 AM
|
#28
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,641
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6
I guess you’ve fallen behind
|
Anyone who uses these sites is free to read their TOS before joining/using.
When Trump spoke in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina ( 2015) he referenced the use by ISIS of social media as a recruitment tool. He recommended to shut off parts of the Internet.
Back in June/July when he wanted to “remove or change” a provision of a law that shields social media companies from liability for content posted by their users. He wanted Congress to repeal their Section 230 protections.
His order was designed to deter social media companies from the stoking of violence on their services and/or using them as recruitment tools.
So now that they are removing these abilities on their services you are complaining?
This was out and out recruitment, with extremists planning OPs for Jan 6th meant to be violent. If I were a media company I would certainly not "allow" extremists to PLAN their Ops (suggesting violence against police officers, secruity guards, and federal employees) on a public forum. Scroll down and see the post suggesting such things:
Last edited by clicknow; 01-09-2021 at 09:18 AM.
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 09:26 AM
|
#29
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,641
|
Meanwhile while some on both sides of the political spectrum support violence, I do not. I don't care if they are looters, BLM, vietnam, trump, alt-right, antifa, left or right....I am 100% anti-violence except in the case of self-defense. People who go to these things are accepting risk and if they behave violently then they put themselves in the line of fire. Peaceful protests are fine with me.
Meanwhile, Sean Hannity says Trump has joined Parler.
|
|
|
01-09-2021, 09:38 AM
|
#30
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk VA
Posts: 6,246
|
Fox is reporting that the DC mayor turned down extra security that was offered by other agencies in the weeks prior to the rally. She was ok with BLM running amok and now this, she should be recalled if possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|