4 ms·
Basically this. I run a small moderated community and the repealing of Section 230 would mean I would become responsible for everything my site's users say if I
by trashburger 6y ago
Basically this. I run a small moderated community and the repealing of Section 230 would mean I would become responsible for everything my site's users say if I dare to moderate anything beyond illegal content. There needs to be a separation under law of social media giants which permeate every corner of social life and small communities.
- dTal 6y agoSerious question - if what your users are saying isn't illegal (because you moderate that away), what's the problem in being "responsible" for it?
- PeterisP 6y agoThe problem is that it's not enough anymore to try to moderate away illegal content on a best-effort basis and you're required to be perfect. In the earlier situation, if the moderation misses some violating content and leaves it there, it's still the sole liability of the poster. With the recent changes, if you don't want to be liable for less-than-perfect moderation, the prudent choice seems to be to avoid any moderation at all; you'll leave all the illegal content alone but at least that won't be your liability.
- belltaco 6y agoIllegal is nebulous, there are two aspects to it, criminal and civil. Civil liability is the one that's most in play here, since criminal content like CP or threats of violence are more easily recognizable. Defamation and libel lawsuits can be problematic, and you can be sued by celebrities and politicians for defamation. Even if you win it, the lawyer fees, and the inconvenience of dealing with the courts etc. isn't worth it at all.