Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Spot the threat to free speech

Spot the threat to free speech

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
106 Posts 15 Posters 3.3k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • LarryL Larry

    When someone does something to hinder free speech (Twitter) a person who speaks up about it and vows to stop them from doing it again (Trump) that person is not guilty of hindering free speech, but of taking action against the blocking of free speech. It's just like man A walks up to man B and hits him in the face with his fist, man B then hits him back, and you're trying to accuse man B of starting a fight.

    jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
    #21

    @Larry said in Spot the threat to free speech:

    When someone does something to hinder free speech (Twitter) a person who speaks up about it and vows to stop them from doing it again (Trump) that person is not guilty of hindering free speech, but of taking action against the blocking of free speech. It's just like man A walks up to man B and hits him in the face with his fist, man B then hits him back, and you're trying to accuse man B of starting a fight.

    Man A vs Man B analogy fails. This is Government vs Man.

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    1 Reply Last reply
    • LarryL Offline
      LarryL Offline
      Larry
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      I didn't know Twitter was a government agency... because you see, it was Twitter that made the first punch.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ Online
        jon-nycJ Online
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by
        #23

        The seventh largest social media site adding commentary to someone's unedited post isn't a threat to free speech.

        The men with guns, or the rules enforced my men in suits with the implied power of the men with guns behind them, is the threat to free speech.

        Only non-witches get due process.

        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
        1 Reply Last reply
        • L Offline
          L Offline
          Loki
          wrote on last edited by
          #24

          We’ve created social platforms that are a perfect host for outside influences to polarize our society. Much of twitter and Facebook is not Americans expressing their right to free speech but meddling and manipulating. The evidence for this in bots is quite clear.

          Second the right to free speech as a person is not the right of anonymous entity to spew polarizing garbage to millions of people. I don’t think the Constitution provides protection for that.

          HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nyc
            wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
            #25

            @Loki
            So you're saying Trump should be banned from Twitter altogether? Oh, never mind. You said anonymous.

            Only non-witches get due process.

            • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
            1 Reply Last reply
            • jon-nycJ Online
              jon-nycJ Online
              jon-nyc
              wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
              #26

              @Loki To be serious I'm dead-dog certain there have been court cases on whether you lose your right to free speech if publishing anonymously and there's no way the courts would have ever allowed that. I think if you reflected on it for a while you wouldn't be for it either.

              Only non-witches get due process.

              • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
              L 1 Reply Last reply
              • LarryL Offline
                LarryL Offline
                Larry
                wrote on last edited by
                #27

                Nope. I'm saying that Twitter tried to limit Trumps free speech, and he has a right to strike back. No, he has an obligation to strike back. We all have the same obligation. If you don't fight against attempts to limit freedom of speech, you will lose it.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • LarryL Offline
                  LarryL Offline
                  Larry
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #28

                  Free speech means free speech. In my way of seeing that, it's none of the courts' business.

                  jon-nycJ taiwan_girlT 2 Replies Last reply
                  • X Offline
                    X Offline
                    xenon
                    wrote on last edited by xenon
                    #29

                    Right - but there's a more basic issue at play here first.

                    Twitter is more akin to a bar.

                    The barkeep reigns supreme in the bar and can tell you to GTFO whenever they want. That's not a first amendment issue.

                    Do we want government to regulate social media as a first step?

                    LarryL 1 Reply Last reply
                    • LarryL Larry

                      Free speech means free speech. In my way of seeing that, it's none of the courts' business.

                      jon-nycJ Online
                      jon-nycJ Online
                      jon-nyc
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #30

                      @Larry said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                      Free speech means free speech. In my way of seeing that, it's none of the courts' business.

                      Well, the courts only get involved when the government tries to limit it. So, if you believe in free speech the courts are your friend.

                      Only non-witches get due process.

                      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • X xenon

                        Right - but there's a more basic issue at play here first.

                        Twitter is more akin to a bar.

                        The barkeep reigns supreme in the bar and can tell you to GTFO whenever they want. That's not a first amendment issue.

                        Do we want government to regulate social media as a first step?

                        LarryL Offline
                        LarryL Offline
                        Larry
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #31

                        @xenon said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                        Right - but there's a more basic issue at play here first.

                        Twitter is more akin to a bar.

                        The barkeep reigns supreme in the bar and can tell you to GTFO whenever they want. That's not a first amendment issue.

                        Do we want government to regulate social media as a first step?

                        The bar analogy doesn't work for me because of the size and reach of Twitter.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • jon-nycJ Online
                          jon-nycJ Online
                          jon-nyc
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #32

                          For the record I think Twitter was idiotic for doing this, best case it will achieve the opposite of what they hoped. That’s the best case.

                          Only non-witches get due process.

                          • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                          taiwan_girlT 1 Reply Last reply
                          • LarryL Offline
                            LarryL Offline
                            Larry
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #33

                            I agree.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • AxtremusA Away
                              AxtremusA Away
                              Axtremus
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #34

                              Oh, if only Trump would boycott Twitter.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • LarryL Offline
                                LarryL Offline
                                Larry
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #35

                                He would still get reelected, because the democrats have embraced a failed ideology and are running a moron for president.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • L Loki

                                  We’ve created social platforms that are a perfect host for outside influences to polarize our society. Much of twitter and Facebook is not Americans expressing their right to free speech but meddling and manipulating. The evidence for this in bots is quite clear.

                                  Second the right to free speech as a person is not the right of anonymous entity to spew polarizing garbage to millions of people. I don’t think the Constitution provides protection for that.

                                  HoraceH Offline
                                  HoraceH Offline
                                  Horace
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #36

                                  @Loki said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                                  We’ve created social platforms that are a perfect host for outside influences to polarize our society. Much of twitter and Facebook is not Americans expressing their right to free speech but meddling and manipulating. The evidence for this in bots is quite clear.

                                  And the thing being exploited here is each individual's eagerness to pounce when the other tribe is seen to be crazy or stupid or evil. The best way to immunize ourselves against those trolls is to stop being so eager to do that.

                                  Education is extremely important.

                                  L MikM 2 Replies Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                    @Loki To be serious I'm dead-dog certain there have been court cases on whether you lose your right to free speech if publishing anonymously and there's no way the courts would have ever allowed that. I think if you reflected on it for a while you wouldn't be for it either.

                                    L Offline
                                    L Offline
                                    Loki
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #37

                                    @jon-nyc said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                                    @Loki To be serious I'm dead-dog certain there have been court cases on whether you lose your right to free speech if publishing anonymously and there's no way the courts would have ever allowed that. I think if you reflected on it for a while you wouldn't be for it either.

                                    Well it’s not the anonymous person that I was thinking about in general but does that North Korean operative in Pyongyang have the right to free speech on Twitter and Facebook?

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • HoraceH Horace

                                      @Loki said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                                      We’ve created social platforms that are a perfect host for outside influences to polarize our society. Much of twitter and Facebook is not Americans expressing their right to free speech but meddling and manipulating. The evidence for this in bots is quite clear.

                                      And the thing being exploited here is each individual's eagerness to pounce when the other tribe is seen to be crazy or stupid or evil. The best way to immunize ourselves against those trolls is to stop being so eager to do that.

                                      L Offline
                                      L Offline
                                      Loki
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #38

                                      @Horace said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                                      @Loki said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                                      We’ve created social platforms that are a perfect host for outside influences to polarize our society. Much of twitter and Facebook is not Americans expressing their right to free speech but meddling and manipulating. The evidence for this in bots is quite clear.

                                      And the thing being exploited here is each individual's eagerness to pounce when the other tribe is seen to be crazy or stupid or evil. The best way to immunize ourselves against those trolls is to stop being so eager to do that.

                                      Let’s assume for a second that certain other countries have a vested interest in polarizing our country, which ones are targeting liberals?

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • LarryL Larry

                                        Free speech means free speech. In my way of seeing that, it's none of the courts' business.

                                        taiwan_girlT Offline
                                        taiwan_girlT Offline
                                        taiwan_girl
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #39

                                        @Larry said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                                        Free speech means free speech. In my way of seeing that, it's none of the courts' business.

                                        But there are limits to free speech. I will admit that I am not a constitution expert, but I do know that "free speech" is not 100% free.

                                        I cannot yell "FIRE" in a crowded movie theater.
                                        If untrue, I cannot posting everywhere that my neighbor is a sex molestor.

                                        (I guess I could, but there would be consequences.)

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                          For the record I think Twitter was idiotic for doing this, best case it will achieve the opposite of what they hoped. That’s the best case.

                                          taiwan_girlT Offline
                                          taiwan_girlT Offline
                                          taiwan_girl
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #40

                                          @jon-nyc said in Spot the threat to free speech:

                                          For the record I think Twitter was idiotic for doing this, best case it will achieve the opposite of what they hoped. That’s the best case.

                                          True, but this situation should never have happened. There are so so so many things going on in the world that President Trump should be focusing on.

                                          Spending his time and energy posting tweets on the death of someone 19 years ago that (as far as I know) has been shown to be a natural death, seems to be a gigantic waste of time, energy, and he should be spending his time more productively.

                                          LarryL 1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups