I do not. But I also don't think we should be putting people in jail for crimes they don't commit in jurisdictions they're not in.
Yes, that's a bad rule. But by including M*lo in the case, they're implying that his content should also be acceptable.
-
-
It was an ad for a book. What about the ad itself is unacceptable? I can envision lots of things that aren't acceptable, but book ads? No.
-
A book that, as I understand it, names and incites harassment against specific individuals who are not public figures.
-
Question: would they realistically carry, and would a court expect them to carry, an ad for a bomb-making book?
-
I would expect them to accept an ad for https://www.amazon.com/Anarchist-Cookbook-William-Powell/dp/1684111374/ … yes.
-
I agree mostly, but in reality I think the opposite will happen. AC banned, harassment of women, poc, trans, nb welcome...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Public transit has a legitimate interest in not shoving content intended to make people feel threatened in their faces.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Rather than that "controversial" should be refined to retain the ability to reject content like M*lo's while not rejecting BC ads.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.