That has happened before, and it will continue to happen. This isn't just about people you disagree with or find abhorrent getting a voice. Hate speech is pretty cut and dry. It's other speech that companies might find "problematic" and decide to silence. That's the fear.
-
-
En réponse à @MystbornGames @Kurioms
And that’s why I said it’s a sticky floor. The minimum required to speak is to not be a Nazi. That’s it.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft @Kurioms
are you still talking about what the ACLU said because I feel like we're discussing two separate things here. I don't disagree with you. I was pointing out that the ACLU are concerned the power social media companies have to arbitrarily silence minority voices like POC activists
1 réponse 0 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @MystbornGames @Kurioms
And if they do that then we fight them. Kicking off the Nazis ain’t it.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 3 j'aime -
You’re also acting like there aren’t POC, trans individuals, sexworkers, and other vulnerable populations having their speech restricted by those platforms already. Not seeing many lawsuits by the ACLU.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 5 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft @Kurioms
I'm aware. Trump getting banned is just what triggered the broader discussion of censorship on social media. It is a not a proper example, because he deserves the ban and it wasn't arbitrary, but that's what Newsweek went with because that's what got people talking
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
A large part of the concern is that institutions like the ACLU can't sue because private company, so when minorities do get arbitrarily silenced, they have no legal recourse. That is part of the problem. You were suggesting the ACLU is defending Nazis, which they were not.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @MystbornGames
The entire article is about a Nazi getting kicked off a platform for violating their policies, and not just violating their policies, REPEATEDLY violating their policies and being afforded INCREDIBLE lenience because he happened to be the President.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 3 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft @MystbornGames
The ACLU, in attempting to suggest that this is somehow a problem, is defending a Nazi (much like they’ve done throughout their history, which is a substantial failing that has led us to this point). “Fomenting insurrection against the government” is not a grey line.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft @MystbornGames
I’d be more concerned about the fact the ACLU continues to have this faction within their organization that somehow sees white supremacy as something that needs protection.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime
Anyways, I’m done with this argument, especially with someone who doesn’t even live in the US and is not affected by the First Amendment to begin with. You have a nice night.
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.