Message from @realz
Discord ID: 774104726433300501
I don't want 230 reform for censorship
I do want 230 reform for the blanket immunity that Barnes talks about
but not for censorship
@realz Like I said, In have no counter-argument but intuitively disagree. I use none of those platforms. I got Discord specifically for this channel.
I don't think 230 is even needed to protect websites, it is unconstitutional IMO to hold websites liable for their user-contributed content
And with that, I take my leave.
Benjamin Franklin didn't analyze every ad that was in his newspaper to see if might be defamation
and 230 reform, if done dumbly, can destroy the internet
Yeah the 230 reform would reduce censorship, not increase it.
Defamation is relevant when it affects the individual defamed... ie Rittenhouse when Biden suggested he was a white supremacist, potentially polluting the jury pool
Haha most laws if done dumbly destroy stuff
basically the "public square" version of 230 reform ... what does this mean for you and your blog?
You have two choices.
1. You can either leave up all comments unmolested.
2. If you delete a single comment, you now must analyze EVERY OTHER COMMENT for legality. Which is actually IMPOSSIBLE to do, because - for example, defamation might require knowledge of facts (i.e if something said is TRUE or FALSE), and this is impossible for a site owner. Furthermore, it would basically require you to hire a lawyer and check every comment for all the laws in all the US.
say helloooo to spam
or pornography
all over your beautiful blog or forum
public square, right?
Not at all. Unless your blog has 70% of all blog traffic lol
OK so that is Barnes' fix to this
most people don't event hink about this
Standard definition of monopoly
Yeah nah
but the 70% fix isn't a good one either
if you have a FB page
you are a moderator
on a website
that is a 70% company
your page is a public square
hello spam
hello porn
also I detest treating differently sized companies differently
and I already made the constitutional argument
it is illegal to force companies to do this
just like it would be illegal to restrict a newspaper from deliverying you ads that might be illegal speech
or charging Fedex for delivering blackmail
Multiple arguments there, fave topic of mine, maybe we need a new chat lol
Can we have a Free Speech / Section 230 chat Mr Gruler plis? 😁
I didn't say anything (never helping out the) cops