I am more interested in seeing who supports what the bullies have done. Don’t use Apple; have only used Google Play a couple of times, so my lack of support won’t register.
Besides, it appears both are on their way to becoming like the outhouse–avoided if anything else is available, but people are willing to hold their noses if nothing else is built.
But but… they own the government111! Or something.
1 Like
vaard
24
So to be clear… trump is not the bully but the victim, correct?
Peter
25
I would probably need a time machine as this article you are so proud of yourself for finding came out after I posted this topic.
So to be clear…
We were discussing Google and Apple. (I am not a fan of any corporation.)
you understand it was because this was literally the first google result. lets remove today and see what google says
The Washington Times - Friday, January 8, 2021
The American Civil Liberties Union on Friday is raising concerns about social media platforms banning users, in the aftermath of Twitter’s decision to permanently suspend President Trump.
no need for no fancy time machine
vaard
28
Ok… but who are they bullying?
Is there a chance that they allowed alot of leeway and after Wednesday they think a line has been crossed? Did they make their decisions arbitrarily? At what point are they allowed to decide?
Publius
29
Don’t you at least tacitly agree to the TOS of most social media platforms when you sign up? If you don’t follow the rules you agree to, seems to me they’re entirely within their rights to kick you out of their sandbox (as someone put it earlier).
Good questions. There is the point it is Twitter’s Playground and they are allowed to make their own rules. On the other hand, Twitter built its playground in America. Does that mean they, in turn, agree to follow American Constitution which includes free speech?
Further, how many (what percentage) of its Twitter population did the Twitter Regime fear might be incited? To do what? Is the Twitter population that unstable? (Sincere question. I do not Twitter, TikTok, Facebook, etc.) If Twitter attracts the unstable, then shouldn’t a higher power ban them for attracting such a clientele?
Isn’t it also fair to expect the Platform to behave reasonably in return. Take a look at President Trump’s Tweets. Anyone who has served on a jury may have heard objections sustained when testimony includes a conclusion of the witness. It seems to me the Twitter platform jumped to a conclusion.
I love the quote that notes that a conclusion is the place someone stops thinking. Did someone stop thinking at Twitter?
vaard
32
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Please point out where the word twitter or corporation appears in the bor or anywhere in the constitution…
If a corporation is required to follow the constitution do they have to have a Congress and hold elections? If twitter arrests me do they have to read me miranda rights?
The constitution is a framework for government and places limits on the things government can do… it does not say that a corporation cannot do those things…
vaard
33
Now a corporation has to adhere to the same level of scrutiny as in a court of law? Should twitter also consider every statement as a sworn statement and prosecute lies as perjury?
Is Twitter acting as if is a governing agent? For example, I wouldn’t have a problem with Twitter saying, “Trump is banned because we don’t like him.” I do have a problem with Twitter saying he is banned because they reached a conclusion where they fear he is able to incite the rest of their membership. Are they saying those who broke into the Capitol last Wednesday all held Twitter accounts?
vaard
35
Do corporations have to abide by all the bill of rights? Do they have to get a twitter warrant before they search through my posts? How does the 10th amendment apply to twitter as a corporation? Do they have to provide a trial by a jury of my peers before they ban me? Do i get representation if i cant afford one?
vaard
36
Twitter is not acting as a governing agent. Can they subpoena someone? Can they arrest, put them on trial and strip them of assets or incarcerate them? Do they have the force of a military to defend them?
Saying you agree with their power to ban him but dont like the reason shows that they are not confined by the 1st amendment… it just means you disagree with them.
Are you saying that the Twitter supervisors lie, but their lies should not be considered perjury? Correct. Twitter supervisors are not sworn to tell the truth, so they can lie about whatever they wish. Perhaps even when announcing one person was “inciting” the rest of the Twitter population.
vaard
38
Its a ridiculous arguement to say that a corporation must adhere to and be limited by the constitution the same way the government is…
They can lock you up in facebook jail without due process. The swine!
I don’t necessarily agree with the banning power of Twitter because Twitter is far from a private club with a select membership. Be that as it may, why should a reason be given for any ban? “Banned” should suffice. Shouldn’t it?
1 Like