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.
Yeah, because we all know that Democrats are paragons of truth.
The only more aggressive group of pathological liars on Earth in positions of political leadership than our own Democrat left is the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). They really are elite when it comes to lying and being deceitful.
While President Trump does tell some lies, he does not hold a candle leading Democrat leftists, or even many of the Democrat left posters in this forum, for that matter. It is not in any way a close call.
Attaching a fact check isn’t editing his posts. It’s a warning to those who read it.
When you sign up for twitter you agree to abide by their rules. The fine print you don’t read. If you have to get screened, that’s on you.
Guess what twitter and others will so if they’re liable? They’ll really start limiting what’s allowed. You think any of trumps tweets would still be up then?
Trumps the king snowflake and is just throwing a hissy fit cause someone called him on his bull****.
If I were jack Dorsey I’d give trump a week long ban for ***** and giggles. See how much whining happens then.
There are rules that they are allowed to make under the law, and rules that they are not allowed to make under the law .............if they want the protections that the law as currently written affords.
They can't have their protection from liability cake and eat it too.
The only more aggressive group of pathological liars on Earth in positions of political leadership than our own Democrat left is the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). They really are elite when it comes to lying and being deceitful.
While President Trump does tell some lies, he does not hold a candle leading Democrat leftists, or even many of the Democrat left posters in this forum, for that matter. It is not in any way a close call.
What a joke.
Trump is the biggest heap of lying **** in modern politics.
I agree with Rubio, once they pick a side and start editing what is presented they are no longer a forum.
This happened to my local weekly newspaper when the editor added a note to someones rant about Trumps coronavirus response by stating that the editorial department considers Trump a "public menace".. Gee way to stay neutral. The following week the editorial page was missing and the week after there were several letters of outrage with promises to cancel subscriptions.
Twitter and other such outlets should not be picking sides and editing what is allowed to be posted.
Can't anyone see the danger with a "free" press that only allows a certain narrative that advances one parties agenda??
Who is forced to use Twitter? No one. No one needs to use Twitter. NO ONE. Don't like it, move to something else.
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,095,590 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713
While President Trump does tell some lies, he does not hold a candle leading Democrat leftists, or even many of the Democrat left posters in this forum, for that matter. It is not in any way a close call.
I agree with Rubio, once they pick a side and start editing what is presented they are no longer a forum.
This happened to my local weekly newspaper when the editor added a note to someones rant about Trumps coronavirus response by stating that the editorial department considers Trump a "public menace".. Gee way to stay neutral. The following week the editorial page was missing and the week after there were several letters of outrage with promises to cancel subscriptions.
Twitter and other such outlets should not be picking sides and editing what is allowed to be posted.
Can't anyone see the danger with a "free" press that only allows a certain narrative that advances one parties agenda??
I mean, everyone can have an opinion but pretty much every forum out there moderates content. You can call it edit or moderate or whatever you want, but on most forums you won't be allowed to post certain content which is at the discretion of the particular forum.
Really two ways of viewing it. One is it's a hold harmless clause. If some trolls come on City Data and post up a bunch of child porn, City Data isn't criminally liable for that. Now, does City Data become a publisher because they delete posts containing child porn since now they're acting as an editor? That's the slippery slope of Rubio's argument. That's clearly editorial but on the other hand everyone wants forums to practice that kind of editorial control. In fact, if they don't the hold harmless clause only goes so far and they may be found to be promoting child porn in which case they would be liable.
Forums as a course of law are allowed to remove content for violating terms of service, copyright infringement, or where the material is illegal without nullifying the general hold harmless clause. On the other hand, courts have also ruled that these platforms in some instances act as public space. For example, the ruling that since Trump and other governments use Twitter to make public addresses they can't block users. It's a public forum and as a government official you can't just censor opinions you disagree with.
That leaves Twitter in somewhat of a bind. Perhaps what they should do is just delete and ban Trump from Twitter since he violates the terms of service. But then Trump is a government official so just because Twitter may disagree with some of his tweets and some of them violate their terms of service, it's not exactly clear that they can ban Trump from Twitter anymore than Trump can block people who disagree with his posts.
I think that's really a legislative issue and we're in need of laws that at least provide a little bit more guidance than a general hold harmless clause on what editorial control forums can exert without being considered publishers and then the courts can work from there and clarify that.
As far as a free press that only allows a certain narrative, no that doesn't bother me. That's what free press means. The press can fact check Trump's lies all day long and there's nothing he can do about it. Many of them do. Or they can not fact check his lies and advance them even when they're lies. That's why it's the free press. Some of them do that too. But then Twitter isn't a publisher. If the press published an article, Trump could sue them for defamation. If a Twitter posts something, Trump could sue the poster but Twitter would be held harmless. Hypothetically Twitter could make it's terms of service such that only negative posts about Trumps are allowed and anyone posting anything that isn't negative would have their comment deleted and be banned. Maybe the shouldn't be able to do that. It's probably going too far and while clearly forums should have some editorial control they arguably shouldn't have that much control, at least not if they want to have immunity for the content that gets posted.
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.
