3 ms·

There are lots of quotes in the OP article that side with GP. Without having done research myself I think it’s plausibly true and the article is full of quotes

There are lots of quotes in the OP article that side with GP. Without having done research myself I think it’s plausibly true and the article is full of quotes that suggest this is the case. Your tone is hostile and that makes me disinclined to take your view. Overall I would side with GP over you and I’d hope other users who haven’t done research themselves would too. Don’t let your biases inform your opinions!

yorwba 9y ago
There are actually several different laws involved here. The newest one is the NetzDG [1] (network enforcement act), that requires all reports of illegal content to be checked within 24 hours. The incentive structure is messed up because there are fines for failure to delete illegal content, but none for unjustified deletion. So the barrier was shifted from "obviously illegal" to "not obviously legal". The quotes in the Reuters article are all about that aspect of the law and of Twitter's enforcement. The other laws that are involved here have been essentially unchanged for a long time and are not really controversial. They are just a bit more subtle than a random Twitter censor is going to appreciate, because they are intended for consideration by a judge. Under these laws, you can absolutely insult everyone equally, and Volksverhetzung is equally illegal, no matter which group it is directed against. Edit: [1] The German text of the NetzDG is here: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/netzdg/BJNR335210017.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/netzdg/BJNR335210017.html
kadenshep 9y ago
>Your tone is hostile and that makes me disinclined to take your view. >Don’t let your biases inform your opinions! These are not complimentary positions, they're pretty exclusive of each other. Methinks you just wanted to take the high ground with some generic platitude and misdirect the conversation.
- hateduser2 9y ago
  They can’t be exclusive of each other if I successfully hold both at once
  - kadenshep 9y ago
    Yes they most certainly can and are.

yorwba 9y ago

There are actually several different laws involved here. The newest one is the NetzDG [1] (network enforcement act), that requires all reports of illegal content to be checked within 24 hours. The incentive structure is messed up because there are fines for failure to delete illegal content, but none for unjustified deletion. So the barrier was shifted from "obviously illegal" to "not obviously legal". The quotes in the Reuters article are all about that aspect of the law and of Twitter's enforcement. The other laws that are involved here have been essentially unchanged for a long time and are not really controversial. They are just a bit more subtle than a random Twitter censor is going to appreciate, because they are intended for consideration by a judge. Under these laws, you can absolutely insult everyone equally, and Volksverhetzung is equally illegal, no matter which group it is directed against. Edit: [1] The German text of the NetzDG is here: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/netzdg/BJNR335210017.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/netzdg/BJNR335210017.html

kadenshep 9y ago

>Your tone is hostile and that makes me disinclined to take your view. >Don’t let your biases inform your opinions! These are not complimentary positions, they're pretty exclusive of each other. Methinks you just wanted to take the high ground with some generic platitude and misdirect the conversation.

hateduser2 9y ago
They can’t be exclusive of each other if I successfully hold both at once
- kadenshep 9y ago
  Yes they most certainly can and are.