Who decides what is "better"?http://j.mp/2n3aRuQ
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This article is pretty fast and loose with its usage of the terms free, hate, controversial, rhetoric and the like. It’s also pretty obvious that they are saying their defining free speech, and that opposition to their classification should be stopped.
-
Correction “they’re* defining”
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Not a matter of "who" but a matter of what. The article says that better means "questioning and challenging opinions with sound arguments and evidence...share views and experiences while committing to high ethical and intellectual standards for open, constructive conversations."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Historically, clerics in religious courts.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Only if all ideas circulate, then better ideas can emerge. Only when all ideas can compete, we can evaluate the ones that are objectively better (in the sense that they better "represent" reality of the facts). This is why freedom of speech is not only important but fundamental.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If we followed this idea to its logical conclusion, wouldn't that invalidate all laws? I mean, who really gets to decide libel is wrong?
-
There’s a large difference between trying to decide what is”better” and what has been proven false. Libel typically refers to spreading false information to a third party that is not involved.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.