Removing 203 would mean that the websites would be responsible for what users post

only sites that edit their site weez

because the publisher wasn't libel, they didnt have grounds to censor anyone

What an odd request, Anubis.

a platform is the opposite of that model

as in like edit the site posted by users on it

Isn't it for all websites that provide the service?

@dichloroarsine i bet your mum didnt know anything about economics when she forgot to buy a condom and had to deal with raising a little bitch for 15 years

<:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>

a platform IS libel and thus CAN censor based on a contract

MisesMedia redpilled me on economics <:hypersmugon:544638648721604608>

What the fuck are all you losers doing on here anyway?!

@Lucienne d'Anwyl actually im only 9, but i fuck like a 12 year old

Its Sat night on labor day weekend

Sargon and Metokur redpilled me on Social Issues <:hypersmugon:544638648721604608>

Same thing as you, Anubis.

get out and do something

this is the way it has worked for decades before 230 came along which allowed companies to play both sides

basically section 230 states that Fb and twitter and google are not responsible for what is posted because they do not control it. however... they are controlling it by editing posted content

@Anubis i worked all day u nigger

i dun wanna do something

Im just getting my nice shirt on. im outta this bitch

imagine working <:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>

yes, 230 is an exception to the rule

They're hardly editing content..

imagine being poor

<:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>

remove the exception and the rules take effect making them LIBEL

nah i just live off old money

McDonalds is love. McDonalds is life.

Behave while daddy is out

@Weez they literally alter search results and etc... based on political opinion

they will be SUED out of buisness and whether they censor or not makes no difference because it is the STANDING that matters

https://tenor.com/view/captain-america-avengers-endgame-old-man-idont-think-iwill-gif-14669627

having to work is for poor people

have fun

@Weez Is suppressing conservative news (on the recommended feed AFAIK) considered editing?
https://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006

currently any case against a social media company is dismissed based on lack of standing

Depending on the implementation / design of their system then no @SPOOKY Phil, Ruler of Heck

If it were designed to operate that way. Then it would be working as intended.

They say they did it purposely