1. Before Musk even takes over the company they're already unbanning tons of accounts that were wrongly banned, trying to "fix things" best they can before Musk gets in control

2. Watch the Dorsey, Rogan, Vijaya, & Tim Cast interview, they're called out on that exact topic.

Probably more evidence of unfair moderating but here's a start :winkwink:

haha yeah I have adhd so I probably glossed over it but yeah i'm with you on both points. I don't know if i'm 100% on board with Twitter being regulated but if Musk can keep it inline with a 1A spirit where we can have open discussion on all topics that would be great.

Your gasp of the term "evidence" is incorrect.

Yoel Roth

$44 billion dollars

NY Post Hunter Biden Laptop story

Americas Frontline Doctors

Project Veritas

To my knowledge, Twitter has never once 'fact-checked' CNN, regardless of how many times they posted blatantly false information that was later walked back.


I could go on, but at the end of the day, you and I both know no matter how many facts are given, you'll ignore them and continue believing whatever you want. So have at it.

If we replace "evidence" with "theories" would you be able to respond to the 2 points?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FRXptxBX...g&name=900x900

Have a nice weekend.

Great examples!



America's Frontline Doctors' Prescriber Stripped of All State Licenses

Not even real fucking doctors :1orglaugh

How 'America's Frontline Doctors' Sold Access to Bogus COVID-19 Treatments—and Left Patients in the Lurch

Not sure, but I think this might be against Twitter's TOS

What is Project Veritas?

Twtter tries to limit misinformation. IMO they don't do enough.


You could go on posting bullshit. No doubt.

Hope it becomes a democractic network now. Only one party has a voice in it. That's not democracy.

Project Veritas is one of the most inflammatory and intentionally misleading organizations out there. America Frontline "Doctors" is pretty bogus shit, too.

Comparing them to CNN is pretty silly. Cable news networks are about as reliable as my taint hair as far as "news" goes, but... Project Veritas especially is a pretty dog shit, conspiracy laden organization that's more focused on peddling far-right horse shit than anything related to reality.

These guys think free speech is being able to say whatever you want, wherever you want, without consequences.

Reminds me of my bouncing days. Dudes would talk shit to the quiet dude with cauliflower ear then get mad that I threw them (the shit talkers) out after they got rolled.

It's kinda the same principle. Far-righties say a lot of inflammatory, factually inaccurate horse shit, then get butt hurt that people point it out / stop advertising on their platform (or tell the platform they'll pull advertising spend if they don't do something) / successfully sue them for defamation (unless they're cowards and declare bankruptcy), etc.

But I do hate a lot of the "woke" bullshit on the left, too. It's just not as rampant as the right, though it's equally as annoying.

The problem is, who decides what's misinformation? I can site both sides claiming misinformation when it wasn't. Wouldn't it be ideal and in the spirit of 1A to let all speech (speech that is protected under 1A) be present and let the truth counter misinformation?

Free speech is about protecting speech you disagree with.

Well, that's where the left's circular logic comes into play. Under their ideology, any speech that goes against what they think and/or believe is "misinformation" and should be silenced. That's the game they like to play when justifying censorship.

I know. That's the conundrum. It's also pretty evident that one side does it far more often (in recent years anyway) than the other, and they're the ones most butthurt because their talking points don't align with reality in a lot of ways.

The truth does in a lot of ways - that's why a lot of these organizations have settled multiple defamation suits (like Project Veritas), or declared bankruptcy (Alex Jones / InfoWars) to avoid losing a massive defamation lawsuit. The far-right then whines that the courts are "liberal socialist evil commies" or whatever the fuck dumb shit they say. So, I mean, circular logic or something, right? :)

Yet Texas and other GOP led states are literally banning books. :1orglaugh

Ya'll two just need to admit that populists in both parties are basing policy around what'll get circulated on Twitter the most by their base rather than thoughtful policy that will actually benefit the public.

You're wrong.

You can't come to my house or place of business and say whatever you want. You can't yell out "fire" in a theatre. Free speech has limits. And like I already explained, the 1st amendment protects you from persecution from the state, not private entities.

No. bro. It's just that you believe a lot of misinformation and fake news (evident from your sources), and want to spread that bullshit without consequences. That shit don't fly. At least not on private companies that make their own rules and want to avoid hate speech and misinformation. Want to believe antivax crap? Want to talk about "rigged elections" and whatnot? Build your own site and have at it. Nobody can stop you.

I know that. Your response has nothing to do with my statement.

Free speech is about protecting speech you disagree with.

You're only protected against the government. What is it about that you don't understand?

Those of you that wish to "limit misinformation" and such..

Who should be doing it, to make it fair and without bias?

If you own Twitter (FB, GFY or whatever) you get to decide what's misinformation. For the most part, social networks will go with professional opinion and trusted sources, I would imagine, to avoid lawsuits, and to avoid having their sites turn into Stormfront. If you have some fake "doctors" like Americas Frontline Doctors pushing Ivermectin or making anti-vax claims, that's probably not good for business.

Until recent years, world never had private companies with such influence on shaping the global public.

Not sure what can or needs to be done but I doubt that it is good for the future.

A teacher's job is to teach students, not indoctrinate them regardless of ideology. CRT is a marxist theory that has no place in the school system. And if it were a bunch of right-winger nutjobs trying to inject their ideology into the school system, you would agree with me. I'd still hold the same position. I'm against the "1776 initiative" or whatever it's called as much as I am CRT.

Also, deciding which textbooks are or aren't allowed in school has nothing to do with the 1st amendment because teachers are public servants, and the public school system is regulated by the government. It's literally part of their responsibility, which is why, for example, up until recently anyway, talking to kindergarteners about sexual topics wasn't permitted. Teachers can't curse out students or show them porn magazines either... so on and so forth.

I never claimed otherwise. I don't subscribe to either political party because they're two sides of the same coin. This doesn't change the fact that anything which goes against the leftist agenda is heavily suppressed and censored.

If you sat down in front of congress and testified that your house is a platform for speech that allows open discussion from all viewpoints equally, then turned around and did the exact opposite, there would be consequences (unless, of course, you donated millions of dollars to the same politicians you testified to). The only reason platforms such as Twitter and FB haven't been held accountable for this is because of the almighty dollar.

Also, no one is talking about calls to action being covered under any form of free speech... stop pretending as such.

Okay, let's play this game. What factual evidence do you have that proves that which you claim is "misinformation"? Talking heads on the mainstream media all parroting the same lines do not count as factual evidence, FYI.

Without turning this into a debate about covid, Ivermectin, as well as monoclonal antibodies, and various other treatments have been proven to be effective against covid. Period. This is irrefutable. The reason the big pharma, the CDC, and other government officials are claiming otherwise is because admitting that effective treatments for covid already exist would prevent them from releasing an experimental drug en masse.

You really should question why big pharma companies were permitted to keep private all data regarding the vax for, what, 75 years?

Again, it's all about the almighty dollar. 9 new billionaires from the vax. 40 new billionaires from "fighting covid". 500 some odd new billionaires thanks in some way or another to the pandemic.

Anyway, as far as "build your own site and have at it. Nobody can stop you" goes... Umm, yes they can, and have. Parler.

Yes, I'm sure you'll respond to that with some ideological talking point as to why shutting Parler down was a good thing. And around and around we go.

I understand that completely and have said as much in my first post in this thread, but you seem to want to keep circling back to this for some odd reason. Twitter and FB have both openly claimed to the public as well as under oath to congress, that they are unbiased and support freedom of speech regardless of views or beliefs, but this is simply not the case.

If you hire people who have openly called a sitting president and a major political party "nazis" and "racists" and other such leftist buzzwords as the head and members of your fact-checking and moderation teams, you did not hire professionals, you hired ideologues.

Sure, it's within their right to do so as private companies, but a private company shouldn't then be able to turn around and testify to congress that they're not censoring people based on ideological agendas without consequence. I'm also sure some arguments of discrimination could be made here as well, which they're not necessarily protected from.

But, again, follow the money.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FRcu9TeX...pg&name=medium

CRT isn't and never has been taught in K-12, but what's reality gotta do with anything? :winkwink: It's more fun to just believe made up talking points and regurgitate them! And get mad about absolutely nothing! It's so fun!

I said banning books in libraries; not anything to do with text books in classrooms. Reading comprehension is an important skill to have.

Though I am against any ideology being taught in K-12 (in public schools anyway). Bill Maher had an excellent piece about this a couple weeks ago, where he showed one of the examples from the Florida textbooks and it was fucking stupid - IIRC, a "math problem" using a chart of political ideology to explain charts. I'm all for that and things like that being yanked.

It's kind of important for you to not regurgitate made up shit by far-right talking heads and populist politicians if you want to appear neutral or objective, though.

Funny, considering parents of one of the local school districts, not more than 20 minutes from where I live in PA, have been in a constant battle with their school board over injecting CRT into their curriculum for the better part of a year now.

Public grade schools all across the country are injecting CRT into their lessons. 1619 Project, anyone?

To pretend something doesn't exist because you don't want to believe it exists doesn't make you right, it makes you ignorant.

It's kind of important for you to not regurgitate far-left talking points when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

I know you'll scoff at the following with the far-left favorited method of "debating" that involves never actually reading the data but immediately rejecting it due to the source not being on your "trusted" list, but here it is anyway: https://criticalrace.org/k-12/

Oh, and, before attempting to cite me for lack of reading comprehension, you might like to keep track of what you actually wrote:

No mention of libraries, so I merely assumed you were talking about schools as it's been a relatively hot topic talking point of the left recently.

So much bullshit in this post I don't know where to begin, so I wont. Have fun believing lies. Conspiracy theorists and right-wing nuts might applaud you, but don't expect anyone intelligent to take you seriously.

Another among the favorited "debate" tactics by leftists... calling something bullshit and running away. I don't blame you, it's pretty much impossible to debate facts when you have none of your own.

For a second there, I thought you actually wanted to have a discussion like grown-ups. Oh well.

I already gave you a chance to post your so-called "facts" and all you did was rant. Project Veritas, Frontline Doctors, Hunters' Laptop, etc.

No facts from you, just random right-wing talking points and misinformation. I said what I had to say. People like you are too far down the rabbit hole to be helped. We're done here.

Speaking of facts, the only thing you've actually provided as "facts" from your point of view is saying "nuh-uh".

We both know it doesn't matter how many facts I, or anyone else for that matter, provide, you'll either find some justification for the censorship, or stick to "nuh-uh" and childish retorts.

Elon Musk literally bought Twitter primarily due to the grossly imbalanced censorship, but, sure, stick to that "nuh-uh" stance.

I mean, parents here whined about it, too, but it wasn't at all in the curriculum(nor has it been). Just because Susan Housewife got upset after watching Tucker Carlson doesn't mean it's true. Surely you're smarter than that.

1619 Project seems more like some essays that a teacher may have classes read or something - not necessarily a full curriculum change. This was the first time I'd seriously looked into it (thanks - seriously) - but the idea that the American Revolution was fought to keep slavery seems pretty silly at best. I've read pretty much all of the Federalist Papers, etc., and that's rarely if ever mentioned, so.. :helpme

https://www.city-journal.org/critica...can-classrooms
I don't know that I'd consider that "CRT", but I don't think that's the appropriate place to discuss those topics. Teach the history (including slavery) - no reason for all this extra fluff... goes into my point below about "both sides using the issue to get votes .. rather than offer any real solution".

Touche. :1orglaugh

I don't really have an issue with any of the examples I saw being banned for K-3. But I think both sides are just using the issue as a way to get votes. Our education system is fucking dog shit and neither side has offered any real solution.

Banning books from libraries, though, is gross.