A point that is entirely wrong (and sophomoric).
-
-
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @Humanisticus
There's a difference between choosing to provide a platform for expression and being obliged to provide one to people you don't like.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MattyPGood @Humanisticus
Oh god. You really think that hasn't occurred to me?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @Humanisticus
...I reiterated Peter's point about not being platformed on private property...something that you called "entirely wrong"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @Humanisticus
Then let me use your twitter account.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MattyPGood @Humanisticus
If my twitter account was the only way people could do things with words, then my not letting you use it would be a free speech issue.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @Humanisticus
If that's your basis for comparison, then the google search results example you brought up isn't either, because there's always Bing
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MattyPGood @Humanisticus
Okay, so if they were banned by all private companies dealing in search. No free speech issues?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @Humanisticus
Let's flip this around. Would you compel all search engines to display terrorist recruitment, bomb-making instructions, or child pornography
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
No, let's not flip it around. I think I've demonstrated why the actions of private companies can have free speech issues. That's all.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.