3 ms·

So, your position is that a business can ban anyone. AT&T can ban you because you like candy. Yes, candy is evil and destroys millions of teeth. And if someone

So, your position is that a business can ban anyone. AT&T can ban you because you like candy. Yes, candy is evil and destroys millions of teeth. And if someone is not satisfied, we should just scream at Dorsey until he caves.

yoav 6y ago
So your position is that you can walk into any private business that offers free cookies (eg. A car dealership or bank) and then hold a rally to incite violence in that establishment and you believe they’d have to go to court to have you removed from their private property? Your twitter account is not a product. The product is sold to advertisers. And even the ads they will or won’t show has guidelines they are not legally forced to show ads that would incite violence. The legal argument being made in multiple threads about freedom of speech like this demonstrates that you all know literally nothing about freedom of speech or what it means
- ergocoder 6y ago
  In your imaginary scenario, the shop owner would get to safety and call police to handle the matter. The shop owner wouldn't be the one who judge and come up with punishment. The justice system would do that. That's my position. Twitter is an important communication platform. And there should be a due process for banning an elected leader.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    Should Twitter have to go to court to ban an account because it happens to belong to some [elected] school committee member in some small town somewhere? If not, where do you draw the line? State governors? Town Mayors? Town School Committee Members?
    - ergocoder 6y ago
      It doesnt sound hard to figure it out. Let's go with the president/senates of the most powerful country on the planet first. Ultimately, we should apply to every official leader of every country. But that can come later. Yes, we can get the court order (or whatever it is, I'm not familiar with the name) to forbid Trump from using Twitter. We do this all the time while performing investigation (e.g. forbidding a person to travel after making bail).
      - sokoloff 6y ago
        The devil is in the details, as usual. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legalized-marijuana.html http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legali... (skip to "credit card buckets") When twitter was launched, would George W Bush have been granted a non-suspendable account on day 1? Should Biden get a non-suspendable Parler account on Jan 21? Would the members of the House of Representatives also be non-suspendable or is that for Senators only? California is larger than many countries by many measures. Should California's elected leaders have the same privileges as Italy's or the Netherlands'? "It doesn't sound hard to figure it out" hides a lot of complexity which needs to be dealt with. To me, it actually does sound fairly hard (or labor-intensive at a minimum) to figure it out to a level of detail required to pass a law.
        ergocoder 6y ago
        Perfect is the enemy of good. Let's just start with the most powerful person on the planet first, which POTUS, on the most popular social networks, which are FB and Twitter. We don't need to figure now what to do with, for example, a senate from Namibia. My position is that, if we are gonna ban an elected leader, let's get a judge to issue a court order. It's the same thing with search warrant or the arrest, and we can do that in a timely manner. The problem that I see is that nobody is pushing for having a proper process at all. Also, our tax law is like 100x more complex than this. So, yeah, it doesn't sound hard.

yoav 6y ago

So your position is that you can walk into any private business that offers free cookies (eg. A car dealership or bank) and then hold a rally to incite violence in that establishment and you believe they’d have to go to court to have you removed from their private property? Your twitter account is not a product. The product is sold to advertisers. And even the ads they will or won’t show has guidelines they are not legally forced to show ads that would incite violence. The legal argument being made in multiple threads about freedom of speech like this demonstrates that you all know literally nothing about freedom of speech or what it means

ergocoder 6y ago
In your imaginary scenario, the shop owner would get to safety and call police to handle the matter. The shop owner wouldn't be the one who judge and come up with punishment. The justice system would do that. That's my position. Twitter is an important communication platform. And there should be a due process for banning an elected leader.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  Should Twitter have to go to court to ban an account because it happens to belong to some [elected] school committee member in some small town somewhere? If not, where do you draw the line? State governors? Town Mayors? Town School Committee Members?
  - ergocoder 6y ago
    It doesnt sound hard to figure it out. Let's go with the president/senates of the most powerful country on the planet first. Ultimately, we should apply to every official leader of every country. But that can come later. Yes, we can get the court order (or whatever it is, I'm not familiar with the name) to forbid Trump from using Twitter. We do this all the time while performing investigation (e.g. forbidding a person to travel after making bail).
    - sokoloff 6y ago
      The devil is in the details, as usual. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legalized-marijuana.html http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legali... (skip to "credit card buckets") When twitter was launched, would George W Bush have been granted a non-suspendable account on day 1? Should Biden get a non-suspendable Parler account on Jan 21? Would the members of the House of Representatives also be non-suspendable or is that for Senators only? California is larger than many countries by many measures. Should California's elected leaders have the same privileges as Italy's or the Netherlands'? "It doesn't sound hard to figure it out" hides a lot of complexity which needs to be dealt with. To me, it actually does sound fairly hard (or labor-intensive at a minimum) to figure it out to a level of detail required to pass a law.
      - ergocoder 6y ago
        Perfect is the enemy of good. Let's just start with the most powerful person on the planet first, which POTUS, on the most popular social networks, which are FB and Twitter. We don't need to figure now what to do with, for example, a senate from Namibia. My position is that, if we are gonna ban an elected leader, let's get a judge to issue a court order. It's the same thing with search warrant or the arrest, and we can do that in a timely manner. The problem that I see is that nobody is pushing for having a proper process at all. Also, our tax law is like 100x more complex than this. So, yeah, it doesn't sound hard.