ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 5 of 5
< 12345
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Paulies will be unleashed!!
F150 04:49 PM 01-11-2021

Facebook now considers advocating for liberty to be sedition. Where will it end? https://t.co/Ws6pBq923N

— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 11, 2021

[Reply]
gblowfish 09:37 PM 01-13-2021
I thought you meant this guy!
Attached: paulie.jpeg (19.9 KB) 
[Reply]
cosmo20002 09:53 PM 01-13-2021
Originally Posted by patteeu:
In addition to staking out your anti-free speech position, my earlier response to Lex applies to you too.
Your example has no basis in reality.

I'm not ok with businesses discriminating "for any reason," and that is not legal. Discrimination based solely on political party, which isn't happening anywhere that I'm aware of, doesn't generally seem like a good business decision. But if it happened to me, you won't find me crying about non-existent rights.
[Reply]
patteeu 10:25 PM 01-13-2021
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
Your example has no basis in reality.

I'm not ok with businesses discriminating "for any reason," and that is not legal. Discrimination based solely on political party, which isn't happening anywhere that I'm aware of, doesn't generally seem like a good business decision. But if it happened to me, you won't find me crying about non-existent rights.
Well, like I said, I'm not very interested in your opinions about big tech censorship.
[Reply]
cosmo20002 10:32 PM 01-13-2021
Originally Posted by patteeu:
Well, like I said, I'm not very interested in your opinions about big tech censorship.
My opinions are essentially fact, and I've noticed you like to avoid facts when they are inconvenient for whatever you've already decided.
[Reply]
patteeu 10:44 PM 01-13-2021
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
My opinions are essentially fact...
:-)
[Reply]
GloryDayz 07:42 AM 01-14-2021
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
My opinions are essentially fact, and I've noticed you like to avoid facts when they are inconvenient for whatever you've already decided.
^Imagine being this stupid but still able to breath..

Wait, here he is:


[Reply]
Taco John 11:27 PM 01-15-2021
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
Your example has no basis in reality.

I'm not ok with businesses discriminating "for any reason," and that is not legal. Discrimination based solely on political party, which isn't happening anywhere that I'm aware of, doesn't generally seem like a good business decision. But if it happened to me, you won't find me crying about non-existent rights.
lol

^These guys literally cry over every grievance they can imagine, but they're here to tell you that they'd be completely cool with corporate censorship of their viewpoints in the public square.
[Reply]
neech 11:31 PM 01-15-2021
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
My opinions are essentially fact, and I've noticed you like to avoid facts when they are inconvenient for whatever you've already decided.
That comment is hilarious.
[Reply]
BWillie 12:44 AM 01-16-2021
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
What censorship?

Websites aren't required by law to allow anyone and everyone to post on their sites.

If you don't adhere to their terms of service, you're booted. End of story.
Fair enough but allowing for free speech even if it is damaging is the right thing to do. Its different if your platform isnt giving people their power to speak. Social media is the very best way to communicate with the masses. Not allowing people to use it that are against your ideology is controlling the narrative of society. Dumb people are impressionable and easy to manipulate. Even successful societies such as the Roman Republic had issues with certain communication being too powerful and the dissent not heard. If you are Burger King or Target its a different story and you should be able to censor anyone you want.

Bottom line, even if you are wrong, evil, dumb and misguided you should not be silenced. Let the people decide.

I even think TERRORISTS or MURDERS shouldn't even be censored or blocked. Now, Im all for twitter and facebook fact checking blatant false statements of influential people as long as ppl can see what was said. Blocking them altogether is where I draw the line.
[Reply]
ghak99 11:16 AM 01-16-2021
In the last two days large swaths of people have been told they can no longer create groups or events on the book of faces. In one case Fb went back over 6 years to find an image or meme to flag, which is the assumed reason for the group and event block. That person had never even tried to create a group or event and doesn't believe he had ever even responded to an even invitation.
[Reply]
ClevelandBronco 11:24 AM 01-16-2021
McCarthyism is enjoying its resurrection and yes, I am entertained.
[Reply]
DaneMcCloud 07:17 PM 01-16-2021
Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco:
McCarthyism is enjoying its resurrection and yes, I am entertained.
:-)

Let us know when actors and directors are deported because the government thinks their work promotes Communism or the Congress changes the Pledge of Allegiance, then just maybe it might be somewhat equal to McCarthyism.
[Reply]
DaneMcCloud 07:21 PM 01-16-2021
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Social media is the very best way to communicate with the masses.
Then don't violate the Terms of Service.

I've already stated multiple times that I disagreed with Twitter's decision to ban Trump but it's completely within their right to do so.
[Reply]
cosmo20002 07:36 PM 01-16-2021
Originally Posted by Taco John:
lol

^These guys literally cry over every grievance they can imagine, but they're here to tell you that they'd be completely cool with corporate censorship of their viewpoints in the public square.
:-)
Is that a thing? The idea that a person has a right to have corporations broadcast their views is just bizarre.
[Reply]
Snopes Hammer 07:57 PM 01-16-2021

[Reply]
Page 5 of 5
< 12345
Up