3 ms·

There are rules making bodies in any industry.

throwaway894345 6y ago
If the law requires cooperation with those regulatory bodies (which is to say that the law is deputizing this regulatory body, implicitly or explicitly), then I don't see how those bodies can legally blackball other players. At least, one would hope that a deputy of the government is bound by the same rules which constrain the government itself, or else it's trivial for the government to circumvent any of its constraints (e.g., if the majority party wants the IRS to penalize the minority party, simply deputize some organization affiliated with the majority party, require that businesses obtain the cooperation of that deputy org, and then have that deputy organization blackball businesses affiliated with minority party members).
- John23832 6y ago
  Gab isn’t being blackballed. Gab isn’t restricted from doing business. It’s just forced to do it’s business on its own because it’s not seen as a good citizen. “We could better regulate our site if you gave us better tools to do so” isn’t valid. If they “care about the kids”, the cost for outside help with that is clear, also deal with the far-right/extremist elements on your platform as well. Gab doesn’t want to do that, so the other players are distancing themselves. This mean that the quality of their content moderation when it comes to child pornography is their responsibility. “I’ll do what I want and you must enable me” isn’t a valid argument.
  - throwaway894345 6y ago
    > Gab isn’t being blackballed. Gab isn’t restricted from doing business. It’s just forced to do it’s business on its own because it’s not seen as a good citizen. Right, and it's adhering to its legal responsibilities in the process, so I'm not seeing your issue. By all appearances, Gab does have the resources to operate responsibly as defined by law. Gab appears to be arguing that it could do better if various SV companies would cooperate. It sounds like you're not adding anything new, but merely re-observing the stalemate described in TFA between the entrenched players and Gab. Perhaps you're adding some moral implication that the established players are right to use child porn as a bargaining chip to get Gab to capitulate on free speech--its purported raison d'etre. If that's your position, that's a bit disturbing, but I don't know what goes on at Gab very well--I suppose hypothetically it could be worse than child porn, in which case using child porn as leverage is perhaps the right call. But again, that's a pretty disturbing, hopefully purely hypothetical scenario. > “I’ll do what I want and you must enable me” isn’t a valid argument. No one is making this argument.

If the law requires cooperation with those regulatory bodies (which is to say that the law is deputizing this regulatory body, implicitly or explicitly), then I don't see how those bodies can legally blackball other players. At least, one would hope that a deputy of the government is bound by the same rules which constrain the government itself, or else it's trivial for the government to circumvent any of its constraints (e.g., if the majority party wants the IRS to penalize the minority party, simply deputize some organization affiliated with the majority party, require that businesses obtain the cooperation of that deputy org, and then have that deputy organization blackball businesses affiliated with minority party members).

John23832 6y ago
Gab isn’t being blackballed. Gab isn’t restricted from doing business. It’s just forced to do it’s business on its own because it’s not seen as a good citizen. “We could better regulate our site if you gave us better tools to do so” isn’t valid. If they “care about the kids”, the cost for outside help with that is clear, also deal with the far-right/extremist elements on your platform as well. Gab doesn’t want to do that, so the other players are distancing themselves. This mean that the quality of their content moderation when it comes to child pornography is their responsibility. “I’ll do what I want and you must enable me” isn’t a valid argument.
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  > Gab isn’t being blackballed. Gab isn’t restricted from doing business. It’s just forced to do it’s business on its own because it’s not seen as a good citizen. Right, and it's adhering to its legal responsibilities in the process, so I'm not seeing your issue. By all appearances, Gab does have the resources to operate responsibly as defined by law. Gab appears to be arguing that it could do better if various SV companies would cooperate. It sounds like you're not adding anything new, but merely re-observing the stalemate described in TFA between the entrenched players and Gab. Perhaps you're adding some moral implication that the established players are right to use child porn as a bargaining chip to get Gab to capitulate on free speech--its purported raison d'etre. If that's your position, that's a bit disturbing, but I don't know what goes on at Gab very well--I suppose hypothetically it could be worse than child porn, in which case using child porn as leverage is perhaps the right call. But again, that's a pretty disturbing, hopefully purely hypothetical scenario. > “I’ll do what I want and you must enable me” isn’t a valid argument. No one is making this argument.