SuzukiSavage.com - More proof the left hates freedom of speech

pg Serious Thumper Offline Posts: 5273 In Transit	Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech Reply #45 - 05/07/19 at 18:23:13 So here is an interesting perspective to this. Should the internet service providers be able to discriminate based on user content? Best regards,
Back to top	I don't make the rules, I just know what they are..... IP Logged

Eegore

Serious Thumper

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 8403

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #46 - 05/07/19 at 19:49:48

"So here is an interesting perspective to this. Should the internet service providers be able to discriminate based on user content?"

Can you specify further?

Are you asking for example should Comcast not allow access to Suzukisavage based off a company wide prohibition on motorcycle content?

Legally they can, but they must disclose it. I for one do support the blocking of child trafficking sites, or ones like rape-fantasy sites where people put their ex-girlfriends on there. That last one is legal by the way.

ISIS recruitment for example I think should be blocked, especially the tactics used to put Apps onto middle school kids phones and such.

Schools have paid ISP's to use porn-blocking algorithms for years.

The FCC states the following:

"restrict access to or availability of material”

"considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable”

Back to top

IP Logged

pg

Serious Thumper

Offline

Posts: 5273
In Transit

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #47 - 05/08/19 at 06:21:45

Eegore wrote on 05/07/19 at 19:49:48:

"So here is an interesting perspective to this. Should the internet service providers be able to discriminate based on user content?"

Can you specify further?

It was a theoretical question that inferred ISP do not have to treat communications equally. Furthermore, based on the argument provided in the thread they should be able to screen, filter, and prioritize information and or websites as they see fit based on user agreements.

Best regards,

Back to top

I don't make the rules, I just know what they are.....

IP Logged

justin_o_guy2

Serious Thumper

Offline

What happened?

Posts: 55279
East Texas, 1/2 dallas/la.

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #48 - 05/08/19 at 08:06:36

Everyone is off in the weeds.

People who are saying things that piss off lefties are being banned.
Just because it's not illegal or unconstitutional doesn't make it right.
That it's met with glee by lefties shines a light on the lefties true colors.
Tyrants, afraid of ideas they don't agree with. Unwilling and unable to counter them, they ban the people who say it.

That's the kinda behavior lefties accuse the right of.
Crybullies.

Back to top

The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.- Edmund Burke.

IP Logged

MnSpring

Serious Thumper

Offline

Younger than most
people my age.

Posts: 9400
Minn
Gender: male

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #49 - 05/08/19 at 08:37:29

Eegore wrote on 05/07/19 at 19:49:48:

The FCC states the following:
"restrict access to or availability of material”
"considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable”

So who decides, what, is, 'objectionable' ?

Considering terrorist recruitment as, 'objectionable',
only gets the, terrorist's upset.
A very small number of people.
(And most likely NOT, citizens of this Country)

Banning, 'I like Trump', (or like),
because some UL FDS Socialist, thinks it is, 'objectionable'
Affects the Majority of, Legal and Citizen, voters.

Back to top

Ben Franklin once said: "If you give up a freedom, for the sake of security, you will have neither".
Which is More TRUE, today, than yesterday.('06, S-40, Stock) well, mostly .

IP Logged

Eegore

Serious Thumper

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 8403

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #50 - 05/08/19 at 13:22:18

"Furthermore, based on the argument provided in the thread they should be able to screen, filter, and prioritize information and or websites as they see fit based on user agreements."

Yes. This is how that works currently. When put into practice it is not considered a violation of anyone's rights.

"So who decides, what, is, 'objectionable' ?"

The ISP running the service.

Back to top

IP Logged

Eegore

Serious Thumper

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 8403

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #51 - 05/08/19 at 13:30:37

"Just because it's not illegal or unconstitutional doesn't make it right."

I agree. What I do nota agree with is the claim that it violates the 1st Amendment, or can be classified as "abuse".

"Tyrants, afraid of ideas they don't agree with. Unwilling and unable to counter them, they ban the people who say it."

Actually this is not the reasoning. If you watched the video it is laid out how challenging the situation is and how they facilitate the decision making problems. "Countering" isn't the issue, the issue is violation of the terms of service.

This is no different than saying Fox News, or Infowars must provide equal coverage of information, including allowing guests and articles from people who directly oppose that private companies views and values. Why is it ok for Infowars to screen and publish only what they want, yet Twitter is wrong if they do the same thing?

People who use this technology have a different viewpoint than those who read articles about the technology. Similar to how people who read motorcycle magazines have a different perspective than those who ride and work on them.

Back to top

IP Logged

OlinBow

YaBB Newbies

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #52 - 05/10/19 at 06:31:38

Eegore wrote on 05/08/19 at 13:30:37:

"Just because it's not illegal or unconstitutional doesn't make it right."

I agree. What I do is get my amazing appetite suppressants and not agree with is the claim that it violates the 1st Amendment, or can be classified as "abuse".

"Tyrants, afraid of ideas they don't agree with. Unwilling and unable to counter them, they ban the people who say it."

Actually this is not the reasoning. If you watched the video it is laid out how challenging the situation is and how they facilitate the decision making problems. "Countering" isn't the issue, the issue is violation of the terms of service.

This is no different than saying Fox News, or Infowars must provide equal coverage of information, including allowing guests and articles from people who directly oppose that private companies views and values. Why is it ok for Infowars to screen and publish only what they want, yet Twitter is wrong if they do the same thing?

People who use this technology have a different viewpoint than those who read articles about the technology. Similar to how people who read motorcycle magazines have a different perspective than those who ride and work on them.

It's wrong for Twitter to do it because Twitter claims that they're not content publishers. And when you start censoring people and dictating what goes and what doesn't, you become a content publisher and a whole different set of rules starts to apply to you and your business.

Back to top

« Last Edit: 09/02/23 at 11:29:59 by OlinBow »

IP Logged

justin_o_guy2 Serious Thumper Offline What happened? Posts: 55279 East Texas, 1/2 dallas/la.	Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech Reply #53 - 05/10/19 at 06:45:12 Countering" isn't the issue, the issue is violation of the terms of service. Bullshit.. They USE the Terms of service agreement differently against different people.
Back to top	The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.- Edmund Burke. IP Logged

Eegore

Serious Thumper

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 8403

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #54 - 05/10/19 at 07:49:44

"They USE the
Terms of service agreement differently against different people. "

Yes they do.

Again this, to me, sounds like there is an expectation that Twitter let all users post anything they want, or they are violating the users 1st Amendment rights, or they are abusing that user.

This is fundamentally incorrect, and is equal to saying Fox news needs to let any guest on and also let them talk about anything they want.

The above post about content publishing is much, much closer to a real argument that can change things than going the abuse or 1st Amendment route.

Back to top

IP Logged

justin_o_guy2

Serious Thumper

Offline

What happened?

Posts: 55279
East Texas, 1/2 dallas/la.

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #55 - 05/10/19 at 08:03:20

The point is
Facebook, Twitter, etc. we're introduced as a platform open to the public and a place where anyone could go and say stuff, debate the merits and have a way to reach others. But it's become an echo chamber. Anyone who has any kinda following and doesn't march lockstep lefty gets banned.

It's a political tool of the left.

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/huge-facebook-hired-former-hillary-press-director-
to-inform-media-of-alex-jones-ban/

Back to top

The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.- Edmund Burke.

IP Logged

raydawg

Serious Thumper

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 11551
pacific northwest
Gender: male

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #56 - 05/10/19 at 08:04:06

Eegore wrote on 05/10/19 at 07:49:44:

"They USE the
Terms of service agreement differently against different people. "

Yes they do.

Again this, to me, sounds like there is an expectation that Twitter let all users post anything they want, or they are violating the users 1st Amendment rights, or they are abusing that user.

This is fundamentally incorrect, and is equal to saying Fox news needs to let any guest on and also let them talk about anything they want.

The above post about content publishing is much, much closer to a real argument that can change things than going the abuse or 1st Amendment route.

Ok, personally I think when you restrict any type of commerce, and that is what twitter is, and then complain about it, is a circle argument.
Like Obama complained about the unfairness of FOX, etc, and Trump, about EVERYONE else Grin

Just don't patronize.....that is the repair in our capitalistic society.

Now having said that Eegore, if you say twitter has the right to terms of agreement, then why can't a baker utilize the same defense in what he creates?

Back to top

“The biggest big business in America is not steel, automobiles, or television. It is the manufacture, refinement and distribution of anxiety.”—Eric Sevareid (1964)

IP Logged

Eegore

Serious Thumper

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 8403

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #57 - 05/10/19 at 08:11:05

"Now having said that Eegore, if you say twitter has the right to terms of agreement, then why can't a baker utilize the same defense in what he creates?"

I didn't say Twitter has a right to a Terms of Agreement, I said they have one that customers agree to. It can be restricted and modified by using the correct laws.

The baker was sued for discrimination, not violating the 1st Amendment, not for abusing their customer, I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Back to top

IP Logged

justin_o_guy2 Serious Thumper Offline What happened? Posts: 55279 East Texas, 1/2 dallas/la.	Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech Reply #58 - 05/10/19 at 11:09:22 What grounds did the court decide the baker was justified on?
Back to top	The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.- Edmund Burke. IP Logged

Eegore

Serious Thumper

Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 8403

Re: More proof the left hates freedom of speech
Reply #59 - 05/10/19 at 12:46:16

"What grounds did the court decide the baker was justified on?"

You already know this. But you most likely did not read the entirety of the Supreme Court decision and justification.

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/04/16-111_j4el.pdf

The important part of this is that people here are intermixing the plaintiff and the defendant at will to justify a 1st Amendment argument.

The Baker was not sued for violating the 1st Amendment. (Like people say Jones can do to Twitter) He was sued for Discrimination. (Somehow not the course of action for Jones.)

In this case the Baker is Twitter, they are the defendants.

Back to top

IP Logged