Battle for Section 230 - The Situation Monitoring Thread for Monitoring the Situation of the Situation Monitor's Situation Monitoring

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
HomerSimpson said:
The rich are only humans.
Click to expand...
The poor too. Like every revolution in history you kill the ugly and replace it with disgusting.
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid said:
This is why making a Twitter clone under a .gov would be the biggest middle finger they could give and I sincerely don't understand why they don't just do that anyway.
Click to expand...
Everyone will scream about cutting their budgets. Experts hired (assuming this Boomer administration can hire people who are good at their job and not only at pitching themselves) will ask for gigantic payouts because they can and they're not stupid. Making a Twitter clone is cheap but advertising, expanding, buying and maintaining servers and having security experts making sure China/Russia won't hack this shining beacon of temptation isn't.
 
Dankula giving a dumb take.
1590999985424.png

Social media sites won't have to make any decision, if 230 is rescinded, the decision's been made for them. More people need to read the law and actually understand its provisions and exceptions. There's nothing editorial about removing or hiding content, only in altering what it conveys. You would have to do Stalin-style editing to become a publisher.
 
kuniqsX said:
The poor too. Like every revolution in history you kill the ugly and replace it with disgusting.

Everyone will scream about cutting their budgets. Experts hired (assuming this Boomer administration can hire people who are good at their job and not only at pitching themselves) will ask for gigantic payouts because they can and they're not stupid. Making a Twitter clone is cheap but advertising, expanding, buying and maintaining servers and having security experts making sure China/Russia won't hack this shining beacon of temptation isn't.
Click to expand...
I am of the mind that the government needs to create alternatives to create a competition that encourages growth as a standard against the free market. Not something that moves in on the market or regulates it, since that would kill is, but a government alternative could encourage growth. As for advertising, "fuck you, advertise this, we're the government" lol.
 
Daisymae said:
winning is another story. truth is a defense to libel and its 100% true you violently gangraped Sabrina with your housemate. gb2amb pedo
Click to expand...
FFS, I'm trying to catch up with that riot thread and now you've distracted me with this other rabbit hole to dive into. Fancy linking me the thread?
 
Bender said:
"Dog-Abusing, Trash-Eating Pedo, Neo-Nazi, Fake Tranny, "1st-Wave Incel", Hounded YouTuber to Suicide"

I'm in for one hell of a journey here, aren't I?

Edit: Isn't he the one who doxed Sneasel because he shitposted with the wrong YT account?
Click to expand...
yes you are.

@Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg, did sneasel really leave because you doxed him??
 
The executive order doesn't directly say to repeal section 230, it just says it serves to clarify that Twitter (& the others)--because they choose to censor free speech--should no longer be protected under 230. Am I interpreting this wrong?

I read through the EO and do not see anything about removing section 230 (regardless of Trumps tweets saying REVOKE 230--are we sure this wasn't stating to REVOKE THE PROTECTIONS of 230 for Twitter because they're no longer a protected entity due to their actions), but instead that entities who choose not to be protected under 230 by taking responsibility for the content on its platform should not be given the immunity because it then becomes editorialized, right?

So Kiwifarms which does not censor free speech would still be considered immune under 230, because it's true neutral, and because 230 is not literally being revoked. Based on this part of the EO:

Section 230 was not intended to allow a handful of companies to grow into titans controlling vital avenues for our national discourse under the guise of promoting open forums for debate, and then to provide those behemoths blanket immunity when they use their power to censor content and silence viewpoints that they dislike. When an interactive computer service provider removes or restricts access to content and its actions do not meet the criteria of subparagraph (c)(2)(A), it is engaged in editorial conduct. It is the policy of the United States that such a provider should properly lose the limited liability shield of subparagraph (c)(2)(A) and be exposed to liability like any traditional editor and publisher that is not an online provider.
Click to expand...

my retard brain is really struggling with this

tl;dr:
Isn't this a good thing? As long as 230 isn't literally being revoked, but Twitter (& other big social media) is being recategorized and no longer protected. Which is something we've all been bitching about, being censored by SJWs
 
Last edited:
Daisymae said:
yes you are.

@Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg, did sneasel really leave because you doxed him??
Click to expand...
i don't have his dox. the way it came to me is that he and a number of other really vicious assholes who like to break laws bailed out of here after the data breach last summer.

Daisymae said:
winning is another story. truth is a defense to libel and its 100% true you violently gangraped Sabrina with your housemate. gb2amb pedo
Click to expand...
oh really? can you show me this proof? Do you have an affidavit from somebody verified to be the actual subject? They've run several impostors at me over the past three years. 4Chan rejected this because it's unfounded bullshit with no evidence of anything similar ever happening again. you would be well advised to let it go before it gets you in trouble. If I get my way, there will be a RICO investigation of this site and all it's members posting in this sub forum.
 
Daisymae said:
yes you are.

@Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg, did sneasel really leave because you doxed him??
Click to expand...
For fuck's sake, the staff need to get their "Verified" and "Person of Interest" tags sorted out so we can tell the difference between who's a lolcow posting on the Farms and someone who verified their identity.

@Ride @wagglyplacebo pls relabel people?

Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg said:
i don't have his dox. the way it came to me is that he and a number of other really vicious assholes who like to break laws bailed out of here after the data breach last summer.
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe "dox" was the wrong word, but from what I read it was something to do with him commenting on your video with the wrong account.
 
Bender said:
"Dog-Abusing, Trash-Eating Pedo, Neo-Nazi, Fake Tranny, "1st-Wave Incel", Hounded YouTuber to Suicide"

I'm in for one hell of a journey here, aren't I?

Edit: Isn't he the one who doxed Sneasel because he shitposted with the wrong YT account?
Click to expand...
none of it true other than that I am a well known freegan. I'm a voluntary celibate and prominent anti fascist activist . i'll gladly pay for verified dox for sneasel.
Bender said:
For fuck's sake, the staff need to get their "Verified" and "Person of Interest" tags sorted out so we can tell the difference between who's a lolcow posting on the Farms and someone who verified their identity.

@Ride @wagglyplacebo pls relabel people?

Yeah, maybe "dox" was the wrong word, but from what I read it was something to do with him commenting on your video with the wrong account.
Click to expand...
that would be something internal i'm not aware of.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Daisymae said:
I have sneasel's dox.

Tony Bapst, Bellvue, Michigan.
Click to expand...
You have made a credible threat of violence based on a false accusation of pedophilia. You need to produce the proof of this accusation right here and now, cupcake. Show us your proof.

Bender said:
How much you offering?
Click to expand...
we can discuss that privately.
 
Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg said:
If you have no proof, why do you even make the accusation? because it's trendy with these assholes? 4Chan rejected this because there are no police reports, victim affidavits or any other sign that I'm a MAP. just that single incident and a lot of conjecture based on things i've said.
Click to expand...
I mean how do i prove the dox is real?? Tell me how you want me to
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom