2 ms·
They would pick c. All the legislators have to do is set a minimum size and certain exceptions on what can be removed, eg above 100 million users and remove off
by Mirioron 6y ago
They would pick c. All the legislators have to do is set a minimum size and certain exceptions on what can be removed, eg above 100 million users and remove off-topic and spam. HN and 99% of websites would be unaffected, but Twitter, Facebook et al would have to be more hands off in moderation.
If you own a giant piece of land and the government wants to build a highway over a part of it, it's still possible for them to legally do it, even if you refused.
- kilo_bravo_3 6y agoThen you’re saying that some speech is more free than others. And they won’t pick c, at least not after the first round of lawsuits. As far as highways go, I don’t follow the analogy. The government has to pay me for any land they take. Do you think that they’ll buy twitter just so conservative bigots can have somewhere to go and be bigoted?
- prepperpotts 6y agoif you're removing off-topic comments and spam, you're already moderating. see also: doxxing, child pornography, etc.