3 ms·

The government should create a law to treat them as public places because our rights can be infringed. That doesn't mean Twitter should be funded publically. M

The government should create a law to treat them as public places because our rights can be infringed. That doesn't mean Twitter should be funded publically. Misbehaving != alternative opinion.

ceejayoz 6y ago
Shall we nationalize my employer, too, because I can't yell "fuck you" at my boss? Public universities have additional restrictions because they are organs of the state. Twitter is very definitively not in that category.
- maallooc 6y ago
  You can talk to your boss and face consequences, but we're talking about the case of not being able to talk at all. I think you should learn how to follow a conversation. If a utility company is privately owned and it's denying service because you have 'different opinion about utility prices' thus threatening your life will you stand it?
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    > You can talk to your boss and face consequences, but we're talking about the case of not being able to talk at all. No, we're not. Trump's tweets are still there. He retains the ability to post. All Twitter did was exercise their own free speech by adding a note below it.
    - maallooc 6y ago
      Yeah, how about your speech being marked retarded every time? The court has this power and it can declare a person incompetent. But does twitter have this kind of authority? Also I was not talking about the link being left, I was talking about your account terminated.
      - loopz 6y ago
        There's no inherent right to go unchallenged when raising unsubstantiated claims. Providing facts-checking can be seen as a service in those cases where it is important that the public make informed decisions based on facts. Social media has been mandated to combat fake news, and this is within their mandate, as well as outright banning any person or post on their private platform. It may be good to raise the issue how much power social media should have, but please don't conflate the issue with personal vendettas of some public figures, or too much toleration of relativistic alternative facts.
        maallooc 6y ago
        >It may be good to raise the issue how much power social media should have I was specifically talking about this issue and it's the commentators that went to "personal vendettas or introduction of relativistic alternative facts."
        no-s 6y ago
        hey! if fact-checking is a service, they could un-bundle it. Let the user choose! Let Twitter and Facebook and etc be platforms after all!
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

The government should create a law to treat them as public places because our rights can be infringed. That doesn't mean Twitter should be funded publically. Misbehaving != alternative opinion.

ceejayoz 6y ago

Shall we nationalize my employer, too, because I can't yell "fuck you" at my boss? Public universities have additional restrictions because they are organs of the state. Twitter is very definitively not in that category.

maallooc 6y ago
You can talk to your boss and face consequences, but we're talking about the case of not being able to talk at all. I think you should learn how to follow a conversation. If a utility company is privately owned and it's denying service because you have 'different opinion about utility prices' thus threatening your life will you stand it?
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  > You can talk to your boss and face consequences, but we're talking about the case of not being able to talk at all. No, we're not. Trump's tweets are still there. He retains the ability to post. All Twitter did was exercise their own free speech by adding a note below it.
  - maallooc 6y ago
    Yeah, how about your speech being marked retarded every time? The court has this power and it can declare a person incompetent. But does twitter have this kind of authority? Also I was not talking about the link being left, I was talking about your account terminated.
    - loopz 6y ago
      There's no inherent right to go unchallenged when raising unsubstantiated claims. Providing facts-checking can be seen as a service in those cases where it is important that the public make informed decisions based on facts. Social media has been mandated to combat fake news, and this is within their mandate, as well as outright banning any person or post on their private platform. It may be good to raise the issue how much power social media should have, but please don't conflate the issue with personal vendettas of some public figures, or too much toleration of relativistic alternative facts.
      - maallooc 6y ago
        >It may be good to raise the issue how much power social media should have I was specifically talking about this issue and it's the commentators that went to "personal vendettas or introduction of relativistic alternative facts."
      - no-s 6y ago
        hey! if fact-checking is a service, they could un-bundle it. Let the user choose! Let Twitter and Facebook and etc be platforms after all!

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]