Judge Refuses To Reinstate Parler After Amazon Shut It Down

I'm still wondering why don't have their own servers at this point. I would assume someone out there would invest if they cannot raise the funds themselves.

 

Silly, uninformed post. Antifa isn't partisan in any way. It wants the destruction of government. BLM is about as far from conservatism as one can be.

 

Yes. Good thing. It kept government out of something.

 

Yup!

 

I agree. It would take some time to set it up but it is the answer. They could host other conservatively oriented sites as an additional revenue stream. In the meantime using the Russian host sounds like a decent temporary plan.

 

I need to core t something about this post. The migration from Fox after Nov 4,was to NEWSMAX from Fox after Fox called Arizona. Parler could have had an influx also but not tied to the Arizona decision. I mjspoke!

 

Right, hardware is cheap these days.

 

No idea.

But I think their enforcement of their "speech guidelines" is a little, biased...



"He works for CNN though, so it's cool to suggest lynch people." Dude even retweeted his suggestion to lynch the VP.

Imagineeeeeeee a Fox contributor said that same thing about Obama. That'd be the most racist thing we'd ever heard. He'd be exiled to some small island in the Pacific, if he wasn't executed in the town square first.

Difference is, I'd be disgusted at either and/or both, but many others would not be.

 

Hell Putin can lend his Boy a few rubles so Donnie Boy can buy PARLER and "own" his own site for Fake News and lies.

 

Don't project your wrong opinions about me. Very unbecoming.

I care less if social media even exists.
But if one is going to use it follow the dam rules then you won't lose your rants.

 

I don't see the big deal here. Anyone can do as, say this site and for a tiny bit of money have their site hosted. If they pull the plug simply move to another of 1000's of hosting companies like XENFORO and for as little as $15 bucks a month! If push comes to shove then you simply purchase/rent/copyright the forum software and start hopping from the 10 of thousands of private ISP even international ISP to handle the traffic..

Or simply set up your own gateway/ISP. Not like a T1 is expensive anymore from say AT&T.. In any case Parlor will be back once they pull their heads out their ass and eliminate all the middle men..

The 8 Steps To Opening Your Own ISP

 

Nah. You are WRONG.

Nobody would care, one way or the other.

Even the "If it was Fox" persecution complex has it's limits.

 

There is a compilation of their public posts on twitter and facebook documenting their use of those platforms to plan and execute their anarchy. And yet, AWS still haven't acted. Google haven't acted to demonetize their spewers of hate and misinformation. The apple folks haven't removed twitter or FB from their app store in response to their insurrection. Naked hypocrisy is all these tech tyrants have these days.

 

Well, no, they do care.

That's the whole basis for removing users... inciting violence, like suggesting we lynch political leaders.

 

False. Only if you vote Republican.

 

If BLM is far from conservative and a platform they use is being shut down, one cannot say conservatives are being targeted right?

I'm glad you realize ANTIFA isn't left wing despite the RW propaganda that attempts to affix the ANTIFA movement to the left wing party.

 

Was BLM calling for Pence's head or was it some of Trumps' sycophants? Twitter removed posts with the hashtag.

It takes time for someone to flag a post and Twitter to remove all of them as no algorithm is perfect. I guess if you call 911 and the police come in 30 mins and not right away, you can claim the police don't care right?

 

So what is your point? I agree with your observation but just because those places exist, and if you shut down one another will emerge, but is that an argument to continue shutting them down or to give up?

Should PF allow the selling of drugs, weapons, explosives, child porn, stolen credit cards, passwords etc... because there are other platforms on the internet that does it?

This discussion is not about human nature and the difficulty of changing it. It is about a platform's right to decide what they allow. So if PF chooses to not allow those things you listed they have every right to do so. Just because it will continue to exist somewhere else is irrelevant to the business decision. It may be relevant in a broader discussion about societal behavior.

 

I think you’re right. This isn’t being dealt with from a democratic perspective. People at looking at this from a capitalistic perspective. I think judges are just tossing up their hands, saying “this is a private sector issue that needs to be sorted out by the private sector.”

There’s nothing untrue about that, constitutionally, but it’s not a good sign to see this sort of censorship, becoming so acceptable among, the people, and to see our leaders not even try to dissuade us.

How much of a responsibility does the private sector have to protect our freedom of speech? Constitutionally, none. But we can vote with our wallets.

Some would say social media is a privilege, and our right to use it is only as protected as our user agreements (I know that’s what the owner of this site believes, and that’s fine ). Just 20 years ago, nobody had this ability.

So someone gets banned from Twitter? There’s a variety of sites to choose from. Oh, did they all ban you? Well, nobody’s stopping you from writing to your local paper (who’s under no obligation to print those ideas, by the way), starting a personal blog, or talking out loud in the park.

I don’t know if I support this idea (I’m still trying to hash all this out in my head), but it’s a damn good point depending upon how laissez faire you like your capitalism to be.

 

If the government can(through companies as a proxy) control speech
Do you have evidence the govt is telling these tech companies how to administer their web sites.?

 

It's a very unique problem, we can both agree on that(and that's the fairest way to go about it.) But even outside of this topic, the early response to the coronavirus presented this very dilemma and I had posted so at the time: Personally, philosophically I do believe that if one's morals are righteous and just(which I understand to be/can be subjective), one should die on the petard of their own sword rather than changing their morals.

Morals and opinions are very different things. One can change their opinions depending on the facts on the ground, we should all reserve that right to ourselves. But one should never compromise their moral integrity. Moral integrity is key to the soul, it's the key to our personal happiness. We all have different morals and that too is the challenge for people with different morals to live together in the same world, in the same country even. But we manage because we understand that, we respect that.

And no country highlighted that or preserved that or appreciated that, more than the United States. I think the main chasm in our country is that we lost our namesake. The "United States". It should ring in our hearts, it should reverberate in our conscious. Instead, it's just a name that means nothing.

 

Well, a lot of people took it for granted.

They assumed that if they kept cheering for a corrupt, morally bankrupt, wannabe dictator, that nothing much would change. Their new fuhrer would entertain them with periodic attacks on foreigner of any and all types, wave his wall like a bloody shirt, and steal his ass off while they weren’t looking. (or he had themlooking at something else, preferably something petty and stupid).

None of this endless cofeve was supposed to do any lasting damage.

Storm the capitol building. Just another day in right wing outrage world.

Until it wasn’t.

 

That's complete BS.

Many Republicans use them today. I read them.

 

Thats a good point. Another point is how much power do we want corporations to have. The ability to control information is a mighty weapon.

 

And then let's decide how much power news corporations should have. There are some news site that will never post anything positive about the other side. That's another way of controlling information.