Parlor CEO says they may not ever be able to come Back

PurpnGold · 2021-01-15T14:51:38.032Z

Bosun:

Would you be force to moderate, too?

If I owned a internet message board… and 230 was gone… you betcha

Bosun · 2021-01-15T14:53:43.407Z

Zantax does not own a message board. What exactly were you trying to say?

PurpnGold · 2021-01-15T15:03:32.236Z

Bosun:

Zantax does not own a message board. What exactly were you trying to say?

I know he doesn’t own a message board.

We are speaking about the impacts on internet companies IF 230 went away. IF 230 went away, websites, like this board, would be legally responsible for everything posted here.

With 230 in place, this board cannot be sued, in civil court, for things posted here.

Bosun · 2021-01-15T15:06:18.590Z

We could become human again and express our opinions in a constructive manner

zantax · 2021-01-15T15:06:24.966Z

TommyLucchese:

zantax:

Republicans pioneered anti-trust.

And yet you have been firmly against it from when I first joined this forum until, uh, a week ago. What happened a week ago that turned you into a trustbuster.

Umm no, I have been for pursuing anti-trust against google and amazon for years.

Bosun · 2021-01-15T15:08:27.908Z

Yes you have and you are an upstanding forum member. I have placed you in the esteemed category and respect your opinions.

GWH · 2021-01-15T15:08:30.549Z

Moderator Note

About the topic not the poster, please.

PurpnGold · 2021-01-15T15:09:37.879Z

Bosun:

We could become human again and express our opinions in a constructive manner

Sure. But without 230…a websites like this would be liable for the crazy people who can’t be civilized.

Bosun · 2021-01-15T15:12:12.792Z

True crazy people should be identified and dealt with in appropriate manners. The dehumanization process has taken its toll on constructive conversations. We are going to have to soul search and adapt.

zantax · 2021-01-15T15:13:13.328Z

PurpnGold:

Bosun:

We could become human again and express our opinions in a constructive manner

Sure. But without 230…a websites like this would be liable for the crazy people who can’t be civilized.

Guess we will find out.

from Joe Biden wants to revoke Section 230 - The Verge

In an interview with The New York Times on Friday, former Vice President Joe Biden called for tech’s biggest liability shield, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, to be “revoked, immediately.”

“The idea that it’s a tech company is that Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms,” Biden said. “It should be revoked because it is not merely an internet company. It is propagating falsehoods they know to be false.”

WuWei · 2021-01-15T15:13:29.167Z

tnt:

How does reporting on an item = lying?

FNC et al reporting on election fraud claims were not a lie then.

Sigh.
That wasn’t personal.

Bosun · 2021-01-15T15:13:54.852Z

I enjoyed robust conversations in the past and at the end of the day, no one’s feelings were hurt and no reputations tarnished.

PurpnGold · 2021-01-15T15:20:02.701Z

zantax:

Guess we will find out.

from Joe Biden wants to revoke Section 230 - The Verge

I know what he said… revoking 230 would end this site. However big tech would be just fine with more “censorship”.

I’m for just leaving it alone. It’s the best balance right now.

zantax · 2021-01-15T15:27:59.348Z

I seriously doubt that removing is going to lead to successful civil suits in any instance where the site in question makes a good faith effort to remove defamatory posts. Would probably need to show they didn’t to win. And of course, you would also be able to retain that protection by remaining a neutral open platform as well. It doesn’t need to just be revoked, it needs to be re-written, so that removing otherwise legal speech results in loss of that protection. With an exception for obscenity and porn.

Why? Because free speech is the cornerstone of this country.

PurpnGold · 2021-01-15T15:36:49.907Z

zantax:

I seriously doubt that removing is going to lead to successful civil suits in any instance where the site in question makes a good faith effort to remove defamatory posts.

It’s about risk… even if the ultimately civil suit fails… it still costs money for the website to defend itself.

zantax:

And of course, you would also be able to retain that protection by remaining a neutral open platform as well.

This is not a requirement for 230 protection.

zantax:

It doesn’t need to just be revoked, it needs to be re-written, so that removing otherwise legal speech results in loss of that protection. With an exception for obscenity and porn.

Think about what you just said…imagine a world with the modifications you just laid out.

Facebook removes a post that’s says “Stop the steal!!” The user sues Facebook for removing his post because he believes it was “legal speech”. A huge company like Facebook would fight it and probably win. But what about Parler? Hannity? Gab?

And what the hell is “legal speech”? Can I walk into Walmart and and scream at customers and still be allowed to stay in the store? Of course not.

Hexenbiest · 2021-01-15T15:47:44.430Z

That’s what I have been saying even before the latest fiasco, these are monopolies especially facebook and amazon if you start and e-commerce business good luck without those two. And the fact they can pull whoever they choose has shocked the world. And as you pointed out it’s not just the republicans going after them the democrats are as well.

NPR

48 AGs, FTC Sue Facebook, Alleging Illegal Power Grabs To 'Neutralize' Rivals

The state and federal officials say Facebook's acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram violated competition laws and served to stifle rivals by giving the social network an unfair advantage.

PurpnGold · 2021-01-15T15:49:22.874Z

What changes if Facebook sells off Instagram and WhatsApp?

mwevans1234 · 2021-01-15T15:49:54.748Z

conan:

How do you know they’re lies? Your media told you they were?

Sick burn, bro.

Donald Trump says he won the election in a landslide.

That is a lie - don’t know what else to say if you believe that to be the truth.

In addition to Republican Secretaries of State informing me that he’s full of ■■■■■ I also know he’s full of ■■■■ because he’s been bitching about fraud as far back as the 2016 primaries.

You guys are like more gullible versions of the townspeople in the Boy Who Cried Wolf.

the Guardian – 3 Feb 16

Donald Trump claims Ted Cruz 'stole' Iowa caucuses and calls for new election

The businessman, who came in second in Iowa, tweets that Cruz committed fraud by telling voters that Ben Carson was quitting the race

AP NEWS – 20 Apr 21

Report: Trump commission did not find widespread voter fraud

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The now-disbanded voting integrity commission launched by the Trump administration uncovered no evidence to support claims of widespread voter fraud, according to an analysis of administration documents released Friday...

tnt · 2021-01-15T15:59:01.326Z

WuWei:

FNC et al reporting on election fraud claims were not a lie then.

I agree - it’s not.

But on that same channel dozens of hosts didn’t REPORT on the claims, they AMPLIFIED them. That is the problem.

Note, I didn’t say NEWS SERVICES…I said news CHANNELS.

And of course that comment was personal.

WuWei · 2021-01-15T16:12:31.287Z

tnt:

they AMPLIFIED them