Alex Jones and anything INFOwars, even private people that would replay: BANNED (society, own)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a dangerous path we are on. Censorship in any form threatens freedom.
Threatening and giving th power to take private ownership of resources is just as dangerous. No one has taken freedom of speech here. Info wars and Alex Jones website and radio etc.. Are still active.
How long did it take you to Google that? Did you read it? Understand it?
It means that criminal activity that is carried through a service publisher is held against then end users that commited the breakage of law. That the platform is not held liable.
It is similar to a drug transaction carried through a telephone... The drug dealer in one end of the communication and the purchaser on the other end are liable. The telephone company that carried the communication through their infrastructure is not liable.
And.. It has nothing to do with the topic here. Lol. It still does not preclude the platform, a private entity, the right to how their service and resources are used.
BentBow, you are one of the most active conservatives here... Don't you want small government and pro individual business rights to be protected? Or you just pick and choose accordingly?
I don't consider myself a conservative and even I can see this as a bad thing a mile away. One of the main reasons why I am not active supporter of the Republican party is this hypocrisy. The promise for less intrusion in people's lives yet, I reality they pass just as many laws that do.
Btw... SESTA FOSTA takes some of section 230 away..... Which is a stupid law written by stupid legislators. So if I post a solicitation of sex for pay here, CD can potentially be held liable. Just like net neutrality, SESTA-FOSTA is stupidoty big government intervention that conservatives should be ashamed of themselves for passing.
I don't see how you can be against Net Neutrality and still support Alex Jones being on youtube, sounds like you're choosing both sides in an argument. I don't see a problem with companies banning someone for obvious reasons but to allow them to pick and choose winners is another story,
I can, it is consistent for conservatives to be fairly inconsistent is how they deem what is an attack. Denying gays a wedding cake is fine, denying blacks service is fine (both of which involves law breaking), but denying political figures isn't even though that don't break laws while the other two did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger
I'll consider reconsidering my position on NN when people stop using "what-if"s to support theirs.
It isn't exactly is a "what-if", more of a "when this happens" because the power of removing net neutrality gives Internet Service Providers (ISPs) the ability to throttle for any reason they deem. That is in their terms of use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman
The fact is they could do this and this is something I mentioned numerous times in previous topics about this. It's only a matter of time before they start seeing pressure to block or slow access to highly controversial sites. Getting kicked off YouTube is one thing, the ISP is whole other matter.
Exactly, you can typically find another website where you can go online and post that same view you got banned for breaking terms of use. ISPs are not as easy to because of offerings. They are near monopolies in areas.
How long did it take you to Google that? Did you read it? Understand it?
It means that criminal activity that is carried through a service publisher is held against then end users that commited the breakage of law. That the platform is not held liable.
It is similar to a drug transaction carried through a telephone... The drug dealer in one end of the communication and the purchaser on the other end are liable. The telephone company that carried the communication through their infrastructure is not liable.
And.. It has nothing to do with the topic here. Lol. It still does not preclude the platform, a private entity, the right to how their service and resources are used.
BentBow, you are one of the most active conservatives here... Don't you want small government and pro individual business rights to be protected? Or you just pick and choose accordingly?
I don't consider myself a conservative and even I can see this as a bad thing a mile away. One of the main reasons why I am not active supporter of the Republican party is this hypocrisy. The promise for less intrusion in people's lives yet, I reality they pass just as many laws that do.
Btw... SESTA FOSTA takes some of section 230 away..... Which is a stupid law written by stupid legislators. So if I post a solicitation of sex for pay here, CD can potentially be held liable. Just like net neutrality, SESTA-FOSTA is stupidoty big government intervention that conservatives should be ashamed of themselves for passing.
Certain prolific posters on CD are strongly for a position unless it affects them in a way they don't like, in which case they are against it. For example, certain self-proclaimed strict constitutional textualists like a strict reading of the Constitution, until they don't. They like rugged individualism free from Governmental interference, unless they want the Government to interfere with the way others operate. And, as this thread has shown, they like individual business rights until that business exercises its rights in a way that affects them, in which case they don't like individual business rights.
Its just as the meme says, "'I never thought leopards would eat my face,' sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party."
False! This has nothing to do with so-called, "net neutrality," which has nothing to do with keeping the Internet free and open, but instead is all about government control.
And what does that have to do with the topic? You may claim memory but I don't think you quite understand how the Internet applies.
Even if you don't, you are so very much liberal here.... It is surprising
Shows a pervasive pattern of political bias.
Are the social media giants exercising their 1st amendment, by censorship and banning?
CDA 230 is everything to a content publisher, to keep them from being sued like Alex Jones has, for defamation and libel posted on their website.
Just like when CNN defames and libel someone in the content they publish, they can be sued.
The Social Media Giants want the protections, but do not want to abide by the regulations that come with it.
People are right now defaming and libel Alex Jones on Social Media. Alex Jones cannot defend himself and the lies... His only action now, is to sue the Social Media giants for defamation of character and libel, for each post posted.(each post, separately) $$$$$$$$.$$
This forum here can't be sued for the content posted in these forums. They are protected just like the Social Media giants.
Certain prolific posters on CD are strongly for a position unless it affects them in a way they don't like, in which case they are against it. For example, certain self-proclaimed strict constitutional textualists like a strict reading of the Constitution, until they don't. They like rugged individualism free from Governmental interference, unless they want the Government to interfere with the way others operate. And, as this thread has shown, they like individual business rights until that business exercises its rights in a way that affects them, in which case they don't like individual business rights.
Its just as the meme says, "'I never thought leopards would eat my face,' sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party."
Sadly it isn't here on CD only. I encounter this hypocracy in reality as well. Which is why I have a hard time identifying with the supposedly party of conservatives (nor the democrats for other reasons).
What is even more tragic is that online forums and resources like these offer a world of information and people refuse to learn. Rather than interact, engage, and discuss, these discussions are more about winning an debate. They didn't like this so they throw the 1st at it... It does not apply... Then throw public domain argument at it... It does not applit... Then throw the utilities argument at it... It does not apply... Then throw the libel argument at it... It does not apply... Then now... Throw section 230 at it... It does not apply.
Not once did someone follow through and ask for details on why those arguments don't apply... Not once. In other words a lack of the willingness to stop arguing over something they don't understand and switch to learning about it.
Shows a pervasive pattern of political bias.
Are the social media giants exercising their 1st amendment, by censorship and banning?
CDA 230 is everything to a content publisher, to keep them from being sued like Alex Jones has, for defamation and libel posted on their website.
Just like when CNN defames and libel someone in the content they publish, they can be sued.
The Social Media Giants want the protections, but do not want to abide by the regulations that come with it.
People are right now defaming and libel Alex Jones on Social Media. Alex Jones cannot defend himself and the lies... His only action now, is to sue the Social Media giants for defamation of character and libel, for each post posted.(each post, separately) $$$$$$$$.$$
This forum here can't be sued for the content posted in these forums. They are protected just like the Social Media giants.
And yet I have had my posts removed for calling a certain poster <ahem> a moron, a liar, and a peddler of misinformation because it is against their TOS. And rightly so, because C-D has the right to set the parameters of the content posted on their site. I might not like it, but they are free to do so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
