3 ms·

>some speech shouldn't be tolerated I agree that some speech shouldn't be tolerated. But it cannot be Zuckerberg, or Trump, or Biden, or you, or me, who unilat

>some speech shouldn't be tolerated I agree that some speech shouldn't be tolerated. But it cannot be Zuckerberg, or Trump, or Biden, or you, or me, who unilaterally decides what speech is fine, and what speech is banned.

nobody9999 6y ago
>I agree that some speech shouldn't be tolerated. But it cannot be Zuckerberg, or Trump, or Biden, or you, or me, who unilaterally decides what speech is fine, and what speech is banned. Actually, in my home, I most certainly can unilaterally ban whatever speech I like. And that's a good thing. If the price of my freedom of speech (of which controlling what speech is allowed a platform on my property is a part) is allowing Facebook, Twitter or you to have the same rights, I'm okay with that.
- rndgermandude 6y ago
  I am not, facebook.com is not facebook's home, it's their place of business and it's "critical infrastructure" at this point. It's very different to your house. Zuckerberg and/or you can make rules for your respective actual residence(s) all you want. You have "editorial control" and the associated liability over who comes to your home and what happens in it. facebook.com does not. You will be thrown in prison when somebody uses your kitchen to plan violent attacks, facebook (or Zuckerberg) is not thrown in prison when somebody uses a facebook group to do the same. I also do not agree that corporations are people, in general.
  - nobody9999 6y ago
    I won't address your other points except to point you here: https://www.facebook.com/terms.php https://www.facebook.com/terms.php Think of it as the "no shirt, no shoes, no service" rules of Facebook. And they are fully within their rights to have them. Don't like it? There are ways to change the laws. Depending on what it is that you'd like changed, I'd likely support you. >I also do not agree that corporations are people, in general. Sadly (and I'm not being ironic), the law disagrees. See my above comment about changing the law.

nobody9999 6y ago

>I agree that some speech shouldn't be tolerated. But it cannot be Zuckerberg, or Trump, or Biden, or you, or me, who unilaterally decides what speech is fine, and what speech is banned. Actually, in my home, I most certainly can unilaterally ban whatever speech I like. And that's a good thing. If the price of my freedom of speech (of which controlling what speech is allowed a platform on my property is a part) is allowing Facebook, Twitter or you to have the same rights, I'm okay with that.

rndgermandude 6y ago
I am not, facebook.com is not facebook's home, it's their place of business and it's "critical infrastructure" at this point. It's very different to your house. Zuckerberg and/or you can make rules for your respective actual residence(s) all you want. You have "editorial control" and the associated liability over who comes to your home and what happens in it. facebook.com does not. You will be thrown in prison when somebody uses your kitchen to plan violent attacks, facebook (or Zuckerberg) is not thrown in prison when somebody uses a facebook group to do the same. I also do not agree that corporations are people, in general.
- nobody9999 6y ago
  I won't address your other points except to point you here: https://www.facebook.com/terms.php https://www.facebook.com/terms.php Think of it as the "no shirt, no shoes, no service" rules of Facebook. And they are fully within their rights to have them. Don't like it? There are ways to change the laws. Depending on what it is that you'd like changed, I'd likely support you. >I also do not agree that corporations are people, in general. Sadly (and I'm not being ironic), the law disagrees. See my above comment about changing the law.