3 ms·
The removal of 230 would basically require aggressive censorship of content via moderation, not enable "Free speech". If you're unhappy with the level of modera
by vineyardmike 2y ago
The removal of 230 would basically require aggressive censorship of content via moderation, not enable "Free speech". If you're unhappy with the level of moderation you've witnessed, removing 230 would not prevent "Ideologues" across the political spectrum from "very biased moderation". It would guarantee the most litigious or powerful ideologues wins.
- pclmulqdq 2y agoOh, I agree with you. Removing 230 would practically mean either turning your forum into 4chan or becoming a newspaper. Section 230 just enables the exact behavior that OP was complaining about.
- t-writescode 2y agoWorse. It would mean any forum owner could get *felony* charges for things. Imagine a world where Pastebin, Meetup.com, or “you” and your tiny phpbb got drug trafficking facilitation charges because people used it to trade drugs and you didn’t know.