Basically

At least with companies I have the option not to use them

But I dislike the flip flop of calling for regulation. "Oh, if a baker won't make you a cake, open your own bakery"

"Twitter won't let me on their platform! I demand to be let on their platform!"

Government regulation got us here, and you want to regulate us out of it. Then bitch when the left does the same shit.

^^

Beautifully said

well, the alternative to twitter is not likely to survive the week. it is being kicked off its host later today, and has lost both payment processors.

saying the invisible hand of the free market will fix this problem is making the presumption that there is a free market. but it appears the barriers to entry are very high and that other actors within the market are colluding. moreover, the concept of a free market assumes rational actors seeking profit. that doesn't appear to be the case here, as profit is being forgone for ideological reasons.

@Atkins you fail to get my point. I don't care if Twitter would end up sued to death if you removed it's protection. I don't care if gab is dead if Twitter dies to. I know this is strange for people these days but we got along just fine before Twitter. And I don't think Twitter is even a net good for communication

who are you to tell people how they can and cannot communicate?

I wouldn't be telling anyone anything

I'd let people make their pleasure or displeasure known and felt

you are advocating for a policy that would destroy the ability of social media to exist, and you know it. you just said you don't care.

without protection from liability for the posts made by their users, social media sites could not exist. they would be sued into oblivion. you know this.

and you are OK with it because you personally don't like certain platforms.

You miss the point where I said I am for updating the old platform protection so that if social media doesn't curate, it is protected

who defines what qualifies as curation?

What publishers do

Decide what can and cannot be written

Decide what writers on their staff can and cannot say

They do that, they can get sued for what their writers write.

ok, what if i want to tell everyone on the platform about big dick energy pills that'll give you rock hard erections for hours. only $99.99

There's already something like this and it's a problem

Then you sue the person, not the platform

yeah, but under your policy it would be protected.

No, the platform would be

If you want to remain e.g. kid-friendly, you have to buy into a whole lot of baggage

you can't sue someone for wanting to give you massive boners all night long

Then too bad, if it's lawful speech, it's allowed

It means that if you try _any_ kind of moderation, you're on the hook for all content

the end result of that chain of logic is /b/

which barely survives

Porn laws might make something like that unlawful speech without some kinds of protection

on the edge of bankruptcy and federal seizure

what porn laws?

Those that require porn sites to have the 18 and over check box

i've seen viagra and cialis commercials on TV.

perfectly family friendly

Okay, why can't they be on social media?

why indeed? we can have every second reply to every post be about big dick energy that'll make your woman swoon