Message from @Poppy Rider
Discord ID: 488100487900430346
though we are talking about exclusionary things, not inclusionary shit
Ill try and find more evidence then just a tweet
Honestly fuck the EU. Thank kek for Brexit.
@Grenade123 You remove section 230 and they go absolutely nuts on the censorship. There would now be a financial incentive to always play safe. Plus, the SPLC specializes in lawsuits until an organization folds, do you not see where this would go?
The removal of SESTA and FOSTA is what spurred the mass banning of stuff like the alcohol trade group and various gun groups on Reddit.
It was blocked due to “intolerance”. That category does not come with the software the rest stop uses, it had to be manually added.
I'm not sure framing it as 'conservative ' is going to do them any favours.
@pratel why would they censor with places like the SPLC? when all they would have to do is stop moderating posts all together and be safe from lawsuits?
the whole reason 230 was even brought into law is because a website wanted its cake and eat it too. They wanted to be an editor with the protection of a library
removing 230 means they need to either play it so safe no one uses it, or they don't censor and keep being safe from lawsuits
their choice would be unban alex jones or ban basically half of all blue checkmarks, even trump.
and SESTA/FOSTA didn't open them up to lawsuits, it opened them up to criminal reasonability with jail time. Also that was more legislation, not less.
No one would block the SPLC, that's suicide.
No, the SPLC would find something it didn't like and just start filing lawsuits at everyone. The SPLC is rich enough they could just harrass--even with lawsuits they might not win--to force places, especially smaller platforms, to act as they would like.
230 clearly isn't being used that way. Mostly it just prevents them from being liable for what other people post. I like the idea of decalring that 230 protections require you to then host everyone, but that's clearly not happening now. I don't think repealing 230 is going to just help. It's just going to make all the platforms more scared and more censorious.
Them banning half of blue checkmarks isn't going to happen. Ever. Most blue checkmarks are too famous for that. And you're going to sue CNN for what exactly? And how do you plan to do it?
Jail time is worse, but at some level you're arguing technicalities and "more or less legislation" isn't really that worth arguing over.
@Poppy Rider Sure, but what is anyone going to do about it?
IF you live in the states I suggest some of you start to run for office. Tim has spoke many times about how the 'Left' know how to protest and the 'Right' are playing catch up. Well the serious 'Lefties' are now running for office, running up against dinosaurs.
IF you lot leave it as long as last time you might find you're not allowed to run.
I don't know if running for office really matters that much.
Figuring out how to fight back on the ground seems more worthwhile to me.
Right, put it this way. Gab getting banned was not a top table decision. It was done by the lower levels. Times this by a thousand and you have a real force to deal with. If you had a man at the top table it could of been stopped.
Officers do matter because they're the ones who decide policy
Best way to achieve maximum influence with the least effort
If all you have are shitters controlling the country, guess where it's gonna go
It's all fun and game going around the system but the vast majority don't know, want nor care for this shit, let alone have time for it. Boiling frogs.
We're grown ups now. This isn't a playground cat fight anymore. In the last two years these people have shown how deep they have their claws into the controls of governments and not afraid of using this power while laughing in your face. It's time to man up, time to suit up.
But officers have self-preservation instincts too.
They won't just act unilaterally against a large organized opposition. Even at the top, people can just get rid of you with a nonsensical excuse. Otherwise, there's always someone above you.
Trump being at the top hasn't stopped the bureaucracy from rallying against him and doing what they want anyway.
People on the right are far too hierarchical. They assume that "I just get a promotion and then I am in a position to do something" except that promotion is never enough.
There will always be politicians who rise to the fore. Unless you think that the politicians you're being given are completely misaligned, running is a huge investment that gets your name out and makes lots of enemies very quickly. And you probably won't be successful. Professional Politicians are a thing because they're very good at what they do.
Put another way, only one person can be elected in a district. And odds are, it's not you.
The big mistake is not realizing how tooth an nail the left fights over the institutions. Just turning the cheek or leaving whenever stuff gets politicized/
Not standing and fighting. Not organizing on a local level to act.
The right and center left *fundamentally do not understand organization* and believe in leaving too fast.
They never form groups and fight. And when they do, they get into stupid "who's the better libertarian" BS that ends in people stripping in the nude on stage to be as offensive as possible.
The left, and radical left in particular, meets up on the weekends. They look to gradually shift their institutions to favor their objectives over time.
They *understand what their objectives are* and they are relentless at promoting their comrades and removing their enemies.
The right *doesn't play this game*
And throws up it's hands and talks about "the middle is waking up" while accomplishing less than nothing.
And then they all run for office, but the ground has shifted too far by that point anyway.