Trump vs Twitter

[Read the Footnotes]

My money is on twitter. Thoughts?

[ERICOPOLY]

My money is on twitter. Thoughts?

 

In this corner, the Federal government who claims all news is fake unless it comes out of Trump's mouth, and calls out news networks by name and says they are fake.

 

and,

 

In this corner, Twitter, who claims that information put out by the Federal government might be misleading.

[Castanza]

I haven’t dug into the details so far. But if I had to pick right now I would say Twitter is a private company and should be able to do what they want.

 

What I find ironic is all the individuals who were against the baker in the gay cake ordeal are now for Twitter, FB, etc. And the same is true the other way around.

 

All I know is people need to embrace individualism and quit trying to use government to project on society their personal beliefs.

[LC]

While there can be elegance in simplicity, I think that your perspective on society is simply too black-and-white in this aspect.

 

IMHO Trump is overstepping here, again. It’s that wannabe-dictator mentality of his.

[rb]

I haven’t dug into the details so far. But if I had to pick right now I would say Twitter is a private company and should be able to do what they want.

 

What I find ironic is all the individuals who were against the baker in the gay cake ordeal are now for Twitter, FB, etc. And the same is true the other way around.

 

All I know is people need to embrace individualism and quit trying to use government to project on society their personal beliefs.

Oh geez, here we go with the gay fucking cake again. God forbid some gay dudes want to buy a cake.

 

Everybody with half a brain knows exactly what's going on here. Trump's doing his best primate impression. Twitter did something me no like. I sign bigly executive order with my sharpie.

 

All that being said I'm for it. Trump may be doing this because he's a primate but that doesn't mean that primates can't do something right by mistake.

 

If you want to equate this to a business it's not some dogshit bigoted bakery in Colorado. The social media networks are like a racy club in LA that have a drug dealer in them. Having drugs available is good for business because some of the patrons want to do drugs. But the club can't sell drugs because it's highly illegal. So the owner accommodates and profits from the drug dealing.

 

In the real business with the club this would be highly illegal and the club owner would go do prison for a long time if any of this would get into a court of law. But social media companies managed to carve themselves a niche where it's ok for them to do it.

 

The irony then becomes that the President of the United States starts raining down ecstasy from the DJ booth onto the crowd. The club owner then says that's over the top, you should calm down and deal drugs discreetly like other drug dealers - this is because the club owner has class friends and who won't invite him to a party as this becomes obvious. Then the drug dealing primate says is I'm not allowed do spray MDMA from the DJ booth then noone is allowed to deal drugs in the clubs anymore. So I say fuck it!  Let him clean out all the drug dealers including himself.

[Spekulatius]

So if Twitter puts some fact-checker links below Biden’s tweets, it’s all good?

[LC]

Ultimately it comes down to acknowledging that discrimination against homosexuals is bad, and correcting liars is not bad. But maybe that’s too direct for the snowflakes.

[ERICOPOLY]

Before Twitter, the President would speak and the press would pass the same commentary that Twitter did.

 

Nobody complained.

 

Now it's a crime?

 

Twitter could make it their official policy to do this for all sitting Presidents.  That way, Trump is not being singled out.

[Read the Footnotes]

So if Twitter puts some fact-checker links below Biden’s tweets, it’s all good?

No. Biden doesn't lie constantly so its a total scam. It's a hoax. Fake news. Everybody is against Trump. The entire world faked a pandemic just to make Trump look bad.

 

Everybody has TDS. Libtards.

 

It's a total racket. Biden is probably not lying just to make Trump look bad.

[Read the Footnotes]

I haven’t dug into the details so far. But if I had to pick right now I would say Twitter is a private company and should be able to do what they want.

 

What I find ironic is all the individuals who were against the baker in the gay cake ordeal are now for Twitter, FB, etc. And the same is true the other way around.

 

All I know is people need to embrace individualism and quit trying to use government to project on society their personal beliefs.

Oh geez, here we go with the gay fucking cake again. God forbid some gay dudes want to buy a cake.

 

Everybody with half a brain knows exactly what's going on here. Trump's doing his best primate impression. Twitter did something me no like. I sign bigly executive order with my sharpie.

 

All that being said I'm for it. Trump may be doing this because he's a primate but that doesn't mean that primates can't do something right by mistake.

 

If you want to equate this to a business it's not some dogshit bigoted bakery in Colorado. The social media networks are like a racy club in LA that have a drug dealer in them. Having drugs available is good for business because some of the patrons want to do drugs. But the club can't sell drugs because it's highly illegal. So the owner accommodates and profits from the drug dealing.

 

In the real business with the club this would be highly illegal and the club owner would go do prison for a long time if any of this would get into a court of law. But social media companies managed to carve themselves a niche where it's ok for them to do it.

 

The irony then becomes that the President of the United States starts raining down ecstasy from the DJ booth onto the crowd. The club owner then says that's over the top, you should calm down and deal drugs discreetly like other drug dealers - this is because the club owner has class friends and who won't invite him to a party as this becomes obvious. Then the drug dealing primate says is I'm not allowed do spray MDMA from the DJ booth then noone is allowed to deal drugs in the clubs anymore. So I say fuck it!  Let him clean out all the drug dealers including himself.

I like your analogy and I think it's very appropriate, because we all know that law enforcement and society are willing to look the other way regarding the drug dealer until the President, uh, I mean the "drug dealer" starts getting people killed.

 

A few overdose deaths and some people who were willing to look the other way no longer are willing to tolerate the behavior even if only to save their own businesses or political careers.

[meiroy]

https://samharris.org/podcasts/148-jack-dorsey/

 

" Sam Harris speaks with Jack Dorsey about how he manages his dual CEO roles at Square and Twitter, the role that Twitter plays in journalism, how it’s different from other social media, what makes a conversation healthy, the logic by which Twitter suspends people, the argument for kicking Trump off the platform, Jack’s practice of meditation, and other topics."

 

I listened to it at the time, quite interesting, especially with the current context.

[Castanza]

While there can be elegance in simplicity, I think that your perspective on society is simply too black-and-white in this aspect.

 

IMHO Trump is overstepping here, again. It’s that wannabe-dictator mentality of his.

 

I'm not sure if this is referring to my comment or not? But I think our points agree.

 

At a high level Twitter should be able to do what they want. It's their platform, and nobody is forced to use it.

 

However, there are already clear guidelines in place (Section 230 under CDA). Regarding Contributors, authors, and creators.

 

"If a party only passively displays content that is created entirely by third parties, then it is only a service provider with respect to that content."

 

So to people saying Twitter and Facebook are currently not liable for altering, changing, or contributing to content are completely wrong. Twitter, Facebook and the like can be sued for this exact action.

 

#############################

 

This situation is very tricky. I think the crux of it lies near the discussion of honesty and integrity. Is Twitter and Facebook suppressing certain information and pushing others? That is what most people care about.

 

Do T and FB skew presented information towards specific viewpoints?

 

If they do are they being upfront and honest about it?

 

Is the data skewed because of user choices or because of user choice + algorithm choice?

 

How does the algorithm choose to push information to users?

 

How influential are users decisions in the algorithm and the results/recommendations it presents?

 

How and why are they censoring individuals?

 

Are they being up front and consistent with their censorship and terms?

 

It's not an easy thing to do. There are a lot of gray areas. Perhaps it's time for a 3rd party body (potentially a few) to regularly audit these companies, analyze their code base and algorithms and then compare what they do to the policies and terms shared with users. Simply lay out (probably in private), their code does this, but their policy says this. I Don't know, how do you do that delicately? To me it's clear that we can't continue to do what we currently are. And that is allowing 70 year old congress men and women (who probably can't even setup their own outlook) decide the fate of tech companies and interpret their intentions through fogged glasses.

 

So at a high level, I think they should be able to do what they want. But they should have to be honest and open with what they are doing. Nobody goes to Fox News looking to sue them because they haven't posted any liberal ideas. They are pretty open with their view points and what their political stance is. Likewise for CNN.

 

[Castanza]

I haven’t dug into the details so far. But if I had to pick right now I would say Twitter is a private company and should be able to do what they want.

 

What I find ironic is all the individuals who were against the baker in the gay cake ordeal are now for Twitter, FB, etc. And the same is true the other way around.

 

All I know is people need to embrace individualism and quit trying to use government to project on society their personal beliefs.

Oh geez, here we go with the gay fucking cake again. God forbid some gay dudes want to buy a cake.

 

Everybody with half a brain knows exactly what's going on here. Trump's doing his best primate impression. Twitter did something me no like. I sign bigly executive order with my sharpie.

 

All that being said I'm for it. Trump may be doing this because he's a primate but that doesn't mean that primates can't do something right by mistake.

 

If you want to equate this to a business it's not some dogshit bigoted bakery in Colorado. The social media networks are like a racy club in LA that have a drug dealer in them. Having drugs available is good for business because some of the patrons want to do drugs. But the club can't sell drugs because it's highly illegal. So the owner accommodates and profits from the drug dealing.

 

In the real business with the club this would be highly illegal and the club owner would go do prison for a long time if any of this would get into a court of law. But social media companies managed to carve themselves a niche where it's ok for them to do it.

 

The irony then becomes that the President of the United States starts raining down ecstasy from the DJ booth onto the crowd. The club owner then says that's over the top, you should calm down and deal drugs discreetly like other drug dealers - this is because the club owner has class friends and who won't invite him to a party as this becomes obvious. Then the drug dealing primate says is I'm not allowed do spray MDMA from the DJ booth then noone is allowed to deal drugs in the clubs anymore. So I say fuck it!  Let him clean out all the drug dealers including himself.

 

My point is that at a high level you have people calling for government intervention on the grounds of discrimination for one business, but then saying it's not fine to intervene in another private business. I'm not looking to get into the gay cake discussion. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy among the tribes.

 

 

[Gregmal]

I haven’t dug into the details so far. But if I had to pick right now I would say Twitter is a private company and should be able to do what they want.

 

What I find ironic is all the individuals who were against the baker in the gay cake ordeal are now for Twitter, FB, etc. And the same is true the other way around.

 

All I know is people need to embrace individualism and quit trying to use government to project on society their personal beliefs.

Oh geez, here we go with the gay fucking cake again. God forbid some gay dudes want to buy a cake.

 

Everybody with half a brain knows exactly what's going on here. Trump's doing his best primate impression. Twitter did something me no like. I sign bigly executive order with my sharpie.

 

All that being said I'm for it. Trump may be doing this because he's a primate but that doesn't mean that primates can't do something right by mistake.

 

If you want to equate this to a business it's not some dogshit bigoted bakery in Colorado. The social media networks are like a racy club in LA that have a drug dealer in them. Having drugs available is good for business because some of the patrons want to do drugs. But the club can't sell drugs because it's highly illegal. So the owner accommodates and profits from the drug dealing.

 

In the real business with the club this would be highly illegal and the club owner would go do prison for a long time if any of this would get into a court of law. But social media companies managed to carve themselves a niche where it's ok for them to do it.

 

The irony then becomes that the President of the United States starts raining down ecstasy from the DJ booth onto the crowd. The club owner then says that's over the top, you should calm down and deal drugs discreetly like other drug dealers - this is because the club owner has class friends and who won't invite him to a party as this becomes obvious. Then the drug dealing primate says is I'm not allowed do spray MDMA from the DJ booth then noone is allowed to deal drugs in the clubs anymore. So I say fuck it!  Let him clean out all the drug dealers including himself.

 

My point is that at a high level you have people calling for government intervention on the grounds of discrimination for one business, but then saying it's not fine to intervene in another private business. I'm not looking to get into the gay cake discussion. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy among the tribes.

 

Yup. Thats just standard operating procedure for these people.

[ERICOPOLY]

I haven’t dug into the details so far. But if I had to pick right now I would say Twitter is a private company and should be able to do what they want.

 

What I find ironic is all the individuals who were against the baker in the gay cake ordeal are now for Twitter, FB, etc. And the same is true the other way around.

 

All I know is people need to embrace individualism and quit trying to use government to project on society their personal beliefs.

Oh geez, here we go with the gay fucking cake again. God forbid some gay dudes want to buy a cake.

 

Everybody with half a brain knows exactly what's going on here. Trump's doing his best primate impression. Twitter did something me no like. I sign bigly executive order with my sharpie.

 

All that being said I'm for it. Trump may be doing this because he's a primate but that doesn't mean that primates can't do something right by mistake.

 

If you want to equate this to a business it's not some dogshit bigoted bakery in Colorado. The social media networks are like a racy club in LA that have a drug dealer in them. Having drugs available is good for business because some of the patrons want to do drugs. But the club can't sell drugs because it's highly illegal. So the owner accommodates and profits from the drug dealing.

 

In the real business with the club this would be highly illegal and the club owner would go do prison for a long time if any of this would get into a court of law. But social media companies managed to carve themselves a niche where it's ok for them to do it.

 

The irony then becomes that the President of the United States starts raining down ecstasy from the DJ booth onto the crowd. The club owner then says that's over the top, you should calm down and deal drugs discreetly like other drug dealers - this is because the club owner has class friends and who won't invite him to a party as this becomes obvious. Then the drug dealing primate says is I'm not allowed do spray MDMA from the DJ booth then noone is allowed to deal drugs in the clubs anymore. So I say fuck it!  Let him clean out all the drug dealers including himself.

 

My point is that at a high level you have people calling for government intervention on the grounds of discrimination for one business, but then saying it's not fine to intervene in another private business. I'm not looking to get into the gay cake discussion. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy among the tribes.

 

Anti-discrimination laws you conveniently didn't mention, protecting a class who have been traditionally bullied by society.

 

POTUS has a voice.  Twitter should not be forced to lie down and be a propaganda tool for the highest office in the land.  He clearly uses Twitter as an end-run around traditional news media outlets where experts have always warned the populace about lies.  Trump's followers have no warning filter anymore because he directs them not to watch those media outlets.  It's Trump's work-around for not having state control of all media outlets.  It's the best North Korea he can game within US laws.

[Gregmal]

LOL here we go again. The hypocrisy is OK, because the liberals know whats best for everyone! Its not fair to Trump's audience that he gets to communicate unfiltered!

[Castanza]

I haven’t dug into the details so far. But if I had to pick right now I would say Twitter is a private company and should be able to do what they want.

 

What I find ironic is all the individuals who were against the baker in the gay cake ordeal are now for Twitter, FB, etc. And the same is true the other way around.

 

All I know is people need to embrace individualism and quit trying to use government to project on society their personal beliefs.

Oh geez, here we go with the gay fucking cake again. God forbid some gay dudes want to buy a cake.

 

Everybody with half a brain knows exactly what's going on here. Trump's doing his best primate impression. Twitter did something me no like. I sign bigly executive order with my sharpie.

 

All that being said I'm for it. Trump may be doing this because he's a primate but that doesn't mean that primates can't do something right by mistake.

 

If you want to equate this to a business it's not some dogshit bigoted bakery in Colorado. The social media networks are like a racy club in LA that have a drug dealer in them. Having drugs available is good for business because some of the patrons want to do drugs. But the club can't sell drugs because it's highly illegal. So the owner accommodates and profits from the drug dealing.

 

In the real business with the club this would be highly illegal and the club owner would go do prison for a long time if any of this would get into a court of law. But social media companies managed to carve themselves a niche where it's ok for them to do it.

 

The irony then becomes that the President of the United States starts raining down ecstasy from the DJ booth onto the crowd. The club owner then says that's over the top, you should calm down and deal drugs discreetly like other drug dealers - this is because the club owner has class friends and who won't invite him to a party as this becomes obvious. Then the drug dealing primate says is I'm not allowed do spray MDMA from the DJ booth then noone is allowed to deal drugs in the clubs anymore. So I say fuck it!  Let him clean out all the drug dealers including himself.

 

My point is that at a high level you have people calling for government intervention on the grounds of discrimination for one business, but then saying it's not fine to intervene in another private business. I'm not looking to get into the gay cake discussion. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy among the tribes.

 

Anti-discrimination laws you conveniently didn't mention, protecting a class who have been traditionally bullied by society.

 

POTUS has a voice.  Twitter should not be forced to lie down and be a propaganda tool for the highest office in the land.  He clearly uses Twitter as an end-run around traditional news media outlets where experts have always warned the populace about lies.  Trump's followers have no warning filter anymore because he directs them not to watch those media outlets.  It's Trump's work-around for not having state control of all media outlets.  It's the best North Korea he can game within US laws.

 

I never said they should be forced. I said they should be forced to be honest with their intentions. There is a fine line between propaganda and opposing views. Both tribes like to lump them all together. Some would say Fox News is propaganda! When in reality maybe only a portion of it is and the rest is actually pretty reliable. Same can be said about every other media outlet. Are you really going to argue that the censorship and the criteria that leads to it is well defined and consistent? It’s clearly not. Same goes for YT, and FB.

[Uccmal]

Correct me if I am wrong but when you sign up for a social media service are there not pages and pages of agreements that you make.  I dont imagine Trump has read them, but I bet he signed them.  Maybe he should have Rudy look into what he signed.  I am pretty sure Twitter has got it covered.  And I am betting their army of lawyers is pretty damn smart, unlike the dregs Trump is able to afford. 

[LC]

Castanza, again the lack of nuance:

 

The Colorado baker case was regarding anti-discrimination laws. Trump is not claiming he was discriminated against as part of a protected class. He is being fact-checked because he lies, not because he is an elderly disabled orange person.

 

So where is the hypocrisy? It sounds like another generic talking point being used when facts don't support the conclusion.

[ERICOPOLY]

Its not fair to Trump's audience that he gets to communicate unfiltered!

 

Cubsfan hit it on the head when he stated that Trump is a populist.

 

Years ago, the Atlantic ran a piece on Trump being a populist and pointed out another populist leader in South America who targeted the free press as well, convincing his die-hard followers that the press was lying.

 

Tin-pot. He will not be missed.

[Read the Footnotes]

Castanza, again the lack of nuance:

 

The Colorado baker case was regarding anti-discrimination laws. Trump is not claiming he was discriminated against as part of a protected class. He is being fact-checked because he lies, not because he is an elderly disabled orange person.

 

So where is the hypocrisy? It sounds like another generic talking point being used when facts don't support the conclusion.

Thanks for pointing out that trump is an elderly, morbidly obese, disabled, orange person who identifies as physically fit and highly intelligent.

 

I am not really a fan of intersectionality and neither is Trump, but considering he belongs to more disadvantaged groups than I do, he might want to consider adopting the ideas of intersectionality when moaning about how mistreated he is. Plus he has already stolen so many bad ideas from the radical left, why not steal this position too? It also seems like he wants to make "Trumpism" a protected class.

 

The mere idea protected classes also probably violates the beliefs of many conservatives, Libertarians, Republicans and Trumpists.

[ERICOPOLY]

I also believe the media is still unable to grasp why Trump is de-legitimizing the election ahead of time:

 

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/why-trump-lies-so-aggressively-about-integrity-us-elections-n1215511?cid=referral_taboolafeed

 

MSNBC is speculating that Trump is scheming to rig the election against Democrats.  That's a plausible explanation if you don't understand narcissism.

 

My take is that he is not doing it in order to cheat.  Rather, he needs a narrative with which to lose without accepting that he was defeated.  Trump boasts about people who have lost to him in the past -- he cannot tolerate having that turned on him and he expects that they will (even though they won't because they are not petty like him).  It's a bit of projection there that is creating this extremely deep-seated fear of having his ego tortured by the victor.  So he is hedging that risk by generating an "election was rigged" narrative.  If he wins, he doesn't care that the loser can play the same game, because election rigging isn't his concern at all since he knows it's all a lie.

 

We saw his last claim of voter fraud back after his 2016 victory when he WON!!!  You can correctly pair up the lies about the size of his Inaugural Day crowd with this false voter fraud narrative.  Both were to cover up for his loss of the popular vote, which deeply damaged his ego.

 

He similarly will not investigate the Russian interference for two reasons.  First, he got help and lost the popular vote anyway -- his ego cannot tolerate having a spotlight on this.  Second, he might get more help in 2020 so there is no benefit to following up on the reports of Russian interference. 

 

He has been making a massive deal lately about "Russian collusion hoax" for two potential reasons that I see.  One is that it's a great story to explain why he never got involved in punishing Russia for election interference and furthermore if he loses the election in 2020 he does not want anyone to believe that he got help from Russia and lost anyhow, and two he legitimately thinks it was a dirty trick of the Democrats.

 

 

 

 

[cubsfan]

LOL here we go again. The hypocrisy is OK, because the liberals know whats best for everyone! Its not fair to Trump's audience that he gets to communicate unfiltered!

 

Hard to win a religious argument with these morons ! Castanza will learn the hard way!

[Read the Footnotes]

LOL here we go again. The hypocrisy is OK, because the liberals know whats best for everyone! Its not fair to Trump's audience that he gets to communicate unfiltered!

 

Hard to win a religious argument with these morons ! Castanza will learn the hard way!

[stahleyp]

Ultimately it comes down to acknowledging that discrimination against homosexuals is bad, and correcting liars is not bad. But maybe that’s too direct for the snowflakes.

 

Humans discriminate against each other all the time for various reasons. Do you have evidence that this type of discrimination is "bad" versus the other forms? To me, it just all seems like a bunch of evolutionary instincts so none is really more "bad" than the other. It's just that we've been indoctrinated to believe that some are "good" and some are "bad". We have a bunch of "stone-aged tribesman" to thank for us believing such silly nonsense that "human rights" exist anyway.

 

Heterosexuals are evolutionarily designed to behave that way. Homosexuals are evolutionarily designed that way. Honest people are evolutionarily designed that way. Liars are evolutionarily designed that way. You can't help who you love and you can't help how you much you value honesty (or lack there of). We only think lying is "bad" thanks to indoctrination like "thou shalt not bear false witness" and other teachings. Other indoctrination says that homosexuality is "bad."

 

It's plausible that liars are the truly evolved ones and realize that all of these "moral" ideas are just made up by others.

 

Moral truths do not exist so it's silly to say that discriminating is "bad."