4 ms·

I'm not sure if it's just algorithms. Twitter banned accounts for discussing why we needed to protest for fair elections because they "incite violence", yet Kha

I'm not sure if it's just algorithms. Twitter banned accounts for discussing why we needed to protest for fair elections because they "incite violence", yet Khamenei's tweet of calling for "eradicating" a people and a nation has been there since 2017. Twitter banned accounts for challenging the effectiveness of wear masks because they are "anti-science", yet it didn't do a thing when people were challenging CNN/WHO/CDC's messages that wearing masks was unnecessary and would cause public panic in March 2020. I'd support repealing of section 230 jsut for this level of double standards.

lsh123 6y ago
I think the point of the post is that repealing section 230 would not help with “fairness” on the platforms. The arguments in the post are pretty strong imho.
- amaranth 6y ago
  I think you're seeing this case from the article: > So when you see Trump or other conservatives calling for a Section 230 repeal, sometimes it is just an effort to inflict pain to try and get the platforms to do what they want.
  - wernercd 6y ago
    And what do they want? Fairness... IE: Violent posts from SJWs attacking white people and supporting violence in BLM/AntiFA "protests"? Many MANY still standing and complete silence from the platforms during YEARS of violence, hate and instigation... "violent posts" from conservatives supporting thousands of examples of voter fraud and calling for peaceful marches - just like Trump called for - while questioning the "truth" about mask mandates that have changed on political whims (Fauci: for masks, against masks, for masks, against masks, etc)? THOSE have to be taken down with extreme prejudice... The double standards the platforms are pushing is so extreme that "peaceful scholars" are honored... while American Presidents are banned... You can, for four years, say "russia hacked our elections" with the evidence being a single foreigner paid by the DNC for spy information. But you can't say "democrats hacked our elections" with thousands of Americans presenting evidence. The article is true that no one is going to be happy... but that won't change while the platforms are the massive hypocrites that everyone in the world can see on full display as they push 1984's "Truth".
    - ineptech 6y ago
      The fact that most of society thinks it's much worse to say mean things about black people than to say mean things about white people is not Twitter's fault.
      - zo1 6y ago
        Does Twitter allow it because "most" of society believes it to be true... or does "most" of our perception of society believe it because Twitter allows it? True or not, we mustn't let a potentially minority-held opinion overtake the public sphere because the next generation will most certainly believe it because that's all they'll know. That is why absolute free debate is crucial and feelings should have no part in it.
      - wernercd 6y ago
        The world doesn't think it's worse... the world thinks its hypocrisy to ban for one and not the other. I'm against both... you defend one.
    - etchalon 6y ago
      If you're going to make a point about the hypocrisy of demanding evidence, your example probably shouldn't include such an obviously incorrect statement as the belief that the Steele Dossier was the only evidence produced regarding Russian's interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.
    - bosswipe 6y ago
      > thousands of examples of voter fraud This is not true. > with the evidence being a single foreigner paid by the DNC for spy information. This is not true
      - wernercd 6y ago
        > this is not true https://www.newsweek.com/rnc-chair-says-11000-people-have-come-forward-voter-fraud-claims-1546546 https://www.newsweek.com/rnc-chair-says-11000-people-have-co... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8936201/Kayleigh-McEnany-brandishes-200-affidavits-alleging-voter-fraud.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8936201/Kayleigh-Mc... > this is not true https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clint... https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/fusion-gps-clinton-campaign/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/fusion-gps-clinton-c... https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/409817-russia-collusion-bombshell-dnc-lawyers-met-with-fbi-on-dossier-before https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/409817-russia-collusion-bo... https://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-campaign-dnc-helped-fund-trump-russia-dossier-1508942615 https://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-campaign-dnc-helped-fun... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dnc-clinton-campaign-paid-for-research-in-trump-dossier-report/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dnc-clinton-campaign-paid-for-r...
URSpider94 6y ago
How would repealing 230 address your perceived double standard? Platforms have the right to make editorial decisions about what appears on their platform. Without 230, they’d probably double down on it. Repealing 230 would not somehow provide an Avenue to force them to provide “fair and balanced” coverage. Maybe you just want 230 repealed so the networks can be burned to the ground through a mass of frivolous lawsuits. If so ... no?
- hintymad 6y ago
  I don’t mind bias or stricter rules. Left or right, progressive or conservative, all fair games. I do mind hypocrisy, as hypocrisy is the result of setting narratives regardless of facts or principles. And yes, I don’t mind if twitter goes down.
  - mushbino 6y ago
    How does 230 address hypocrisy? Or are you just airing a personal grudge?

lsh123 6y ago

I think the point of the post is that repealing section 230 would not help with “fairness” on the platforms. The arguments in the post are pretty strong imho.

amaranth 6y ago
I think you're seeing this case from the article: > So when you see Trump or other conservatives calling for a Section 230 repeal, sometimes it is just an effort to inflict pain to try and get the platforms to do what they want.
- wernercd 6y ago
  And what do they want? Fairness... IE: Violent posts from SJWs attacking white people and supporting violence in BLM/AntiFA "protests"? Many MANY still standing and complete silence from the platforms during YEARS of violence, hate and instigation... "violent posts" from conservatives supporting thousands of examples of voter fraud and calling for peaceful marches - just like Trump called for - while questioning the "truth" about mask mandates that have changed on political whims (Fauci: for masks, against masks, for masks, against masks, etc)? THOSE have to be taken down with extreme prejudice... The double standards the platforms are pushing is so extreme that "peaceful scholars" are honored... while American Presidents are banned... You can, for four years, say "russia hacked our elections" with the evidence being a single foreigner paid by the DNC for spy information. But you can't say "democrats hacked our elections" with thousands of Americans presenting evidence. The article is true that no one is going to be happy... but that won't change while the platforms are the massive hypocrites that everyone in the world can see on full display as they push 1984's "Truth".
  - ineptech 6y ago
    The fact that most of society thinks it's much worse to say mean things about black people than to say mean things about white people is not Twitter's fault.
    - zo1 6y ago
      Does Twitter allow it because "most" of society believes it to be true... or does "most" of our perception of society believe it because Twitter allows it? True or not, we mustn't let a potentially minority-held opinion overtake the public sphere because the next generation will most certainly believe it because that's all they'll know. That is why absolute free debate is crucial and feelings should have no part in it.
    - wernercd 6y ago
      The world doesn't think it's worse... the world thinks its hypocrisy to ban for one and not the other. I'm against both... you defend one.
  - etchalon 6y ago
    If you're going to make a point about the hypocrisy of demanding evidence, your example probably shouldn't include such an obviously incorrect statement as the belief that the Steele Dossier was the only evidence produced regarding Russian's interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.
  - bosswipe 6y ago
    > thousands of examples of voter fraud This is not true. > with the evidence being a single foreigner paid by the DNC for spy information. This is not true
    - wernercd 6y ago
      > this is not true https://www.newsweek.com/rnc-chair-says-11000-people-have-come-forward-voter-fraud-claims-1546546 https://www.newsweek.com/rnc-chair-says-11000-people-have-co... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8936201/Kayleigh-McEnany-brandishes-200-affidavits-alleging-voter-fraud.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8936201/Kayleigh-Mc... > this is not true https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clint... https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/fusion-gps-clinton-campaign/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/fusion-gps-clinton-c... https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/409817-russia-collusion-bombshell-dnc-lawyers-met-with-fbi-on-dossier-before https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/409817-russia-collusion-bo... https://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-campaign-dnc-helped-fund-trump-russia-dossier-1508942615 https://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-campaign-dnc-helped-fun... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dnc-clinton-campaign-paid-for-research-in-trump-dossier-report/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dnc-clinton-campaign-paid-for-r...

URSpider94 6y ago

How would repealing 230 address your perceived double standard? Platforms have the right to make editorial decisions about what appears on their platform. Without 230, they’d probably double down on it. Repealing 230 would not somehow provide an Avenue to force them to provide “fair and balanced” coverage. Maybe you just want 230 repealed so the networks can be burned to the ground through a mass of frivolous lawsuits. If so ... no?

hintymad 6y ago
I don’t mind bias or stricter rules. Left or right, progressive or conservative, all fair games. I do mind hypocrisy, as hypocrisy is the result of setting narratives regardless of facts or principles. And yes, I don’t mind if twitter goes down.
- mushbino 6y ago
  How does 230 address hypocrisy? Or are you just airing a personal grudge?