3 ms·

I am saying there is only one legal precedent for Freedom of Speech, at least where I live. I don't think these platforms ever mention they are trying to prote

by slenk 5y ago

I am saying there is only one legal precedent for Freedom of Speech, at least where I live. I don't think these platforms ever mention they are trying to protect freedom of speech, so why would you expect them to?

_yoqn 5y ago
They are acting as the digital public square and free speech is protected in the public square. But don't take my word for it. Please, let hipster Rasputin Jack[off] Dorsey explain: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399105306324993 https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399105306324993
- slenk 5y ago
  But then he immediately essentially says its unsustainable? https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399132116340736 https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399132116340736
NaturalPhallacy 5y ago
>I am saying there is only one legal precedent for Freedom of Speech, at least where I live. That's not what you said though. This is: >Freedom of Speech does nothing for you outside of the government... Again, where did you learn this? I've asked everyone who says it and they never answer. I'd love to learn the source of this horrible misconception so I can do something about it. >I don't think these platforms ever mention they are trying to protect freedom of speech, so why would you expect them to? Reddit did, repeatedly. Then pulled a bait & switch: >We want to democratize the traditional model by giving editorial control to the people who use the site, not those who run it. — Reddit FAQ 2005 >We've always benefited from a policy of not censoring content — u/kn0thing 2008 >A bastion of free speech on the World Wide Web? I bet they would like it," he replies. [reddit]'s the digital form of political pamplets. — u/kn0thing 2012 >We will tirelessly defend the right to freely share information on reddit in any way we can, even if it is offensive or discusses something that may be illegal. — u/reddit 2012 >We stand for free speech. This means we are not going to ban distasteful subreddits. We will not ban legal content even if we find it odious or if we personally condemn it. Not because that's the law in the United States - because as many people have pointed out, privately-owned forums are under no obligation to uphold it - but because we believe in that ideal independently, and that's what we want to promote on our platform. We are clarifying that now because in the past it wasn't clear, and (to be honest) in the past we were not completely independent and there were other pressures acting on reddit. Now it's just reddit, and we serve the community, we serve the ideals of free speech, and we hope to ultimately be a universal platform for human discourse (cat pictures are a form of discourse). — u/yishan 2012 >Neither Alexis [u/kn0thing] nor I created Reddit to be a bastion of free speech — u/spez 2015
- slenk 5y ago
  > Again, where did you learn this? Comprehension of the words in the amendment. It's what it means.
  - NaturalPhallacy 5y ago
    But it doesn't define free speech...
    - slenk 5y ago
      I would have to reference previous defining court cases if you want specifics: https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-re...
      - NaturalPhallacy 5y ago
        I mean it still doesn't define it. All the first amendment does is place restrictions on the government. Free speech is not defined by the amendment at all. It's a wholly separate concept.

by slenk 5y ago

_yoqn 5y ago

They are acting as the digital public square and free speech is protected in the public square. But don't take my word for it. Please, let hipster Rasputin Jack[off] Dorsey explain: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399105306324993 https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399105306324993

slenk 5y ago
But then he immediately essentially says its unsustainable? https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399132116340736 https://twitter.com/jack/status/1037399132116340736

NaturalPhallacy 5y ago

>I am saying there is only one legal precedent for Freedom of Speech, at least where I live. That's not what you said though. This is: >Freedom of Speech does nothing for you outside of the government... Again, where did you learn this? I've asked everyone who says it and they never answer. I'd love to learn the source of this horrible misconception so I can do something about it. >I don't think these platforms ever mention they are trying to protect freedom of speech, so why would you expect them to? Reddit did, repeatedly. Then pulled a bait & switch: >We want to democratize the traditional model by giving editorial control to the people who use the site, not those who run it. — Reddit FAQ 2005 >We've always benefited from a policy of not censoring content — u/kn0thing 2008 >A bastion of free speech on the World Wide Web? I bet they would like it," he replies. [reddit]'s the digital form of political pamplets. — u/kn0thing 2012 >We will tirelessly defend the right to freely share information on reddit in any way we can, even if it is offensive or discusses something that may be illegal. — u/reddit 2012 >We stand for free speech. This means we are not going to ban distasteful subreddits. We will not ban legal content even if we find it odious or if we personally condemn it. Not because that's the law in the United States - because as many people have pointed out, privately-owned forums are under no obligation to uphold it - but because we believe in that ideal independently, and that's what we want to promote on our platform. We are clarifying that now because in the past it wasn't clear, and (to be honest) in the past we were not completely independent and there were other pressures acting on reddit. Now it's just reddit, and we serve the community, we serve the ideals of free speech, and we hope to ultimately be a universal platform for human discourse (cat pictures are a form of discourse). — u/yishan 2012 >Neither Alexis [u/kn0thing] nor I created Reddit to be a bastion of free speech — u/spez 2015

slenk 5y ago
> Again, where did you learn this? Comprehension of the words in the amendment. It's what it means.
- NaturalPhallacy 5y ago
  But it doesn't define free speech...
  - slenk 5y ago
    I would have to reference previous defining court cases if you want specifics: https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-re...
    - NaturalPhallacy 5y ago
      I mean it still doesn't define it. All the first amendment does is place restrictions on the government. Free speech is not defined by the amendment at all. It's a wholly separate concept.