Jump to content

....trump gonna shut twitter down?


RedZone

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, RedZone said:

for basically calling trump a liar?

Good stuff.

 

 

He said regulate of shut down completely all social media platforms (twitter, instagram, facebook, prepgridiron).

That should rack him up some votes...LOL.

Annie Coulter is right.   Trumpy The Ass Clown IS a retard !!!!!

 

 

Rufus>>

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, RedZone said:

for basically calling trump a liar?

Good stuff.

 

 

So Post the clip....

Not everyone licks T''s balls and swallows his words every morning....

like you do...😝

 

What's the context? Twitter, Facebook and Youtube have been actively ignoring their own 'edicts' and user agreements to the point where they are being sued by their own users....is T  "joining the left" in attempting to censor criticism or attemptng to hold them to their own public claims?

 

 

  • Thanks 2
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Down 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Rufus69 said:

He said regulate of shut down completely all social media platforms (twitter, instagram, facebook, prepgridiron).

That should rack him up some votes...LOL.

Annie Coulter is right.   Trumpy The Ass Clown IS a retard !!!!!

 

 

Rufus>>

..that clown is something else.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing about Trump's Twitter rant is that he claims they're censoring free speech, which, for one thing, they're a private company, and secondly, they didn't censor shit, they simply edited to add a data link disproving his claims. Nobody said he can't say whatever he wants on there, and clearly he is constantly doing that. I think maybe his Wharton education failed him on vocabulary and definitions. 

It's a nothing burger as the right wingers like to call it. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

The funny thing about Trump's Twitter rant is that he claims they're censoring free speech, which, for one thing, they're a private company, and secondly, they didn't censor shit, they simply edited to add a data link disproving his claims. Nobody said he can't say whatever he wants on there, and clearly he is constantly doing that. I think maybe his Wharton education failed him on vocabulary and definitions. 

It's a nothing burger as the right wingers like to call it. 

Obama is to blame.....maybe Hillary.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

The funny thing about Trump's Twitter rant is that he claims they're censoring free speech, which, for one thing, they're a private company, and secondly, they didn't censor shit,....

100% false....

people have been banned from twitter you know ....

just like that ban hammer on that GONG.....

giphy.gif

Nice RANT tho 🤣

 

PS: but thanks for showing why they have the right to censor their own shit 👍...

just can't then claim those "freebie gov and legal exemptions" for that supposed "public service".......🙄

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Troll said:

100% false....

people have been banned from twitter you know ....

just like that ban hammer on that GONG.....

giphy.gif

Nice RANT tho 🤣

 

PS: but thanks for showing why they have the right to censor their own shit 👍...

just can't then claim those "freebie gov and legal exemptions" for that supposed "public service".......🙄

 

Trump has not been banned. His claim is that they're censoring free speech with the context being they added a fact check link to his posts there and upset him because he's being called out for lies. He has the same issue with whistleblowers as well. 

They clearly have banned users for violating their terms of service though. That is clearly their right as a privately traded corporation. 

So, once again, you try twisting and taking stuff out of context off on some irrational direction. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They didn't take down his ignorant rants and lies. They just provided a fact check, so, he thinks they've censored him somehow and has now threatened to do something to them as president. Hahaha. Gotta be that fine Wharton education. 

He likes playing on their playground, but, he doesn't like it when they have rules because he should certainly not be subject to any rules. He's the president after all. Rules don't apply to the president. xD

Fact is, on twitter, he's just another member. Especially from his donald duck profile and not the potus profile, although, I think it pretty certain they would apply the rules the same to the potus profile too. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

Trump has not been banned. His claim is that they're censoring free speech with the context being they added a fact check link to his posts there .....

 

100% wrong again 🙄

Modification of some speech over others..... is a form of censorship....

giphy.gif

But way to keep that FANTASTIC RANT going 👍.....

....with nothing but 100% wrong 'personal info' 😝

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

So, once again, you try twisting and taking stuff out of context off on some irrational direction. 

BTW in case you missed it .....

👉My Direction👈  was agreeing with you on a private's ability to censor their own shit....and noting that they then (concurrently) can't legally claim otherwise as a non-private....slander/malice etc. legal laws included.

Which they do BTW....

as in a 100% correct basis for my "irrational directions"...

 

PS: Now what was that meaningful direction 🤔 of that WONDERFUL RANT of yours again ? 🤣

Let me guess....HOW TO BE  100% WRONG IN THE ENTIRE BASIS of your 'meaningful direction' 😝.....

repeatedly...🤣🤣

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, a quick check of twitters rules of service on misinformation as it pertains to elections, voting and then trumps tweets about mail in ballots seems to be consistent with their terms of service.  He’s upset he can’t use their platform to misinform.  Oh well  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Troll said:

BTW in case you missed it .....

👉My Direction👈  was agreeing with you on a private's ability to censor their own shit....and noting that they then (concurrently) can't legally claim otherwise as a non-private....slander/malice etc. legal laws included.

Which they do BTW....

as in a 100% correct basis for my "irrational directions"...

 

PS: Now what was that meaningful direction 🤔 of that WONDERFUL RANT of yours again ? 🤣

Let me guess....HOW TO BE  100% WRONG IN THE ENTIRE BASIS of your 'meaningful direction' 😝.....

repeatedly...🤣🤣

 

 

Yeah, I actually agree here ( edit to add: with everything except the part about me being wrong 😛) I agree with DJT as well. The social media companies need to clean their act up. 

They don't deserve to be protected from prosecution for "allowing" illegal content on their platforms. 

I think that is where he is going with his threat. I do know that suddenly these companies will become much less profitable as they will have to hire more and more moderators to keep up with potentially illegal content. 

This is a double edged sword for both DJT and the social media companies. If the rules protecting them from prosecution get changed, so, then the true censorship will have to begin. Most likely in the form of algos that detect and hide some content until it can be reviewed by humans which either allow or disallow the content due to these legality concerns and potential prosecution. 

There is no easy solution. I personally feel like these companies do the best the can, and in the face of their own biases often times as well. It's pretty tough to sit there with the tools to remove stuff you suspect is a total lie or potentially dangerous and just watch it scroll by without deleting it. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HawgGoneIt said:

There is no easy solution.

Well said...🏆

Doesn't hurt that it generates greater importance for mods now does it ? 😄

 

You also make a good point of both sides live with the results.....

somehow a double edged sword always seem to find a "closer middle"..... than those single edged ones

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

Yeah, I actually agree here. I agree with DJT as well. The social media companies need to clean their act up. 

They don't deserve to be protected from prosecution for "allowing" illegal content on their platforms. 

I think that is where he is going with his threat. I do know that suddenly these companies will become much less profitable as they will have to hire more and more moderators to keep up with potentially illegal content. 

This is a double edged sword for both DJT and the social media companies. If the rules protecting them from prosecution get changed, so, then the true censorship will have to begin. Most likely in the form of algos that detect and hide some content until it can be reviewed by humans which either allow or disallow the content due to these legality concerns and potential prosecution. 

There is no easy solution. I personally feel like these companies do the best the can, and in the face of their own biases often times as well. It's pretty tough to sit there with the tools to remove stuff you suspect is a total lie or potentially dangerous and just watch it scroll by without deleting it. 

The thing is DJT is not wanting legitimacy and truthfulness In postings and tweets, otherwise his posts wouldn’t routinely be the ones in question. 

he’s looking for the ability to remove restrictions and oversight so he can continue on his misinformation campaign. He wants to punish those that oppose him. 

 

 

  • Thanks 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now why would a person who is not looking to leverage media to their political adv ever tweet an expectation out like this to a major news outlet?  DJT has lost the benefit of the doubt that what he does is in the best interest of objectivity and unbiased reporting.  
 

See new Tweets

Tweet

 
 
kUuht00m_x96.jpg
 
 
Many will disagree, but is doing nothing to help Republicans, and me, get re-elected on November 3rd. Sure, there are some truly GREAT people on Fox, but you also have some real “garbage” littered all over the network, people like Dummy Juan Williams, Schumerite Chris...
  • Thanks 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Troll said:

Well said...🏆

Doesn't hurt that it generates greater importance for mods now does it ? 😄

 

You also make a good point of both sides live with the results.....

somehow a double edged sword always seem to find a "closer middle"..... than those single edged ones

Yes to the latter. I think it's as close to the middle as it can really be already. It just so happens a guy with a really huge megaphone and ability to potentially drive additional legislation is feeling cut at the moment. 

I feel like these companies should have some liability in the content they allow, which also lends to the fact that they should also have some liability in protecting their membership from one another. That includes misinformation and bullying. The question is where does that start and end? 

DJT has been afforded a lot... a lot of leeway on the twitter platform especially as it pertains to bullying imo. He is often dropping misinformation as well, but, not all of it is as potentially damaging as undermining the legitimacy of an election. Just imo of course. 

He kind of wants the cake and to eat it too so to speak. He feels bullied or censored when they add a fact check, but, he totally ignores that he is allowed to bully people actively on there which has lead to folks getting death threats and the like. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

The thing is DJT is not wanting legitimacy and truthfulness In postings and tweets, otherwise his posts wouldn’t routinely be the ones in question. 

he’s looking for the ability to remove restrictions and oversight so he can continue on his misinformation campaign. He wants to punish those that oppose him. 

 

 

 

The question lies in whether or not he should be free to spread misinformation under the first amendment and whether or not that applies to private companies that he is using to get his voice out. 

For instance, he can go on camera and lie through his teeth, but, immediately following, a talking head will be along to fact check what he just said. 

I feel like the twitter platform is entering into a similar realm. Facebook has yet to go down that particular path,  it they do push the stuff farther down the suggestion list on people's news feed if they deem to do so "somehow." 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Horsefly said:

Now why would a person who is not looking to leverage media to their political adv ever tweet an expectation out like this to a major news outlet?  DJT has lost the benefit of the doubt that what he does is in the best interest of objectivity and unbiased reporting.  
 

See new Tweets

Tweet

 
 
kUuht00m_x96.jpg
 
 
Many will disagree, but is doing nothing to help Republicans, and me, get re-elected on November 3rd. Sure, there are some truly GREAT people on Fox, but you also have some real “garbage” littered all over the network, people like Dummy Juan Williams, Schumerite Chris...

 

I totally agree. He has no credibility in the fair and balanced dept. Imo. 

Of course others would swear that the media has no credibility and should be marionettes for DJT but not Obama or Biden. Just for DJT, if you catch my drift. 

The world will end if he doesn't get reelected, or so I was told by some guy over the weekend. I just nod and keep on keeping on out in the real world. Haha

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HawgGoneIt said:

 

I totally agree. He has no credibility in the fair and balanced dept. Imo. 

Of course others would swear that the media has no credibility and should be marionettes for DJT but not Obama or Biden. Just for DJT, if you catch my drift. 

 

100% agreement here too 🤣

He promotes himself, and wants others to promote him too.... 🤷‍♂️

 

PS: ALSO VERY obvious he would not be 'bitchin' like this...

....if media outlets had that same 'credibility' of "fair and balanced".

 

 

PS: also sounds amazingly like some people are just hating the player...

and not "the game" ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

 

The question lies in whether or not he should be free to spread misinformation under the first amendment and whether or not that applies to private companies that he is using to get his voice out. 

For instance, he can go on camera and lie through his teeth, but, immediately following, a talking head will be along to fact check what he just said. 

I feel like the twitter platform is entering into a similar realm. Facebook has yet to go down that particular path,  it they do push the stuff farther down the suggestion list on people's news feed if they deem to do so "somehow." 

 

 

 

 

I totally agree. He has no credibility in the fair and balanced dept. Imo. 

Of course others would swear that the media has no credibility and should be marionettes for DJT but not Obama or Biden. Just for DJT, if you catch my drift. 

The world will end if he doesn't get reelected, or so I was told by some guy over the weekend. I just nod and keep on keeping on out in the real world. Haha

At the time these free speech policies were developed, communication was given directly from the sender to the audience whether via letter or direct communication.  The media is a middle-man source today that acts as an agent in disseminating a messsage; twitter, tv feeds, etc and as such they own the rights to the content that comes forward.  I think they win in this argument as they most definitely can monitor and set guidelines for content. Just my.02

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

At the time these free speech policies were developed, communication was given directly from the sender to the audience whether via letter or direct communication.  The media is a middle-man source today that acts as an agent in disseminating a messsage; twitter, tv feeds, etc and as such they own the rights to the content that comes forward.  I think they win in this argument as they most definitely can monitor and set guidelines for content. Just my.02

Absolutely win that HALF .....if that is their choice...

Understandably tho....that choice comes with consequence and responsibilities of it's own...

....and you can't just claim you are a 'neutral platform' for public use free of any and all slander and liable claims as only being the hardware pipeline, not the "manager" of content...

 

You must have missed that...

PS: aside from the fact that no one here ever argued your 1/2 win......(private right to censor) 🙄

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Troll said:

Absolutely win that HALF .....if that is their choice...

Understandably tho....that choice comes with consequence and responsibilities of it's own...

....and you can't just claim you are a 'neutral platform' for public use free of any and all slander and liable claims as only being the hardware pipeline, not the "manager" of content...

 

You must have missed that...

PS: aside from the fact that no one here ever argued your 1/2 win......(private right to censor) 🙄

Them being a neutral platform doesn’t conflict with their terms of service.  They expressly state rules of use which prohibits misinformation on voting issues. His comments on mail in ballots is what they deemed questionable that generated a warning label.  How does this violate neutrality? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Horsefly said:

Them being a neutral platform doesn’t conflict with their terms of service.  They expressly state rules of use which prohibits misinformation on voting issues. His comments on mail in ballots is what they deemed questionable that generated a warning label.  How does this violate neutrality? 

Modifying speech with your own private flavor of scarlet letter...is a form of censorship...

and is NOT BEING NEUTRAL.....DUH!!!

 

You can go back to the children's table now...

giphy.gif

And you can take your hat you tossed in the ring...

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...