Society/Culture Has cancel culture gone too far?

[Sweet Jesus]

Bigfooty like many platforms is wading into publisher territory as it arbitrarily determines which opinions are fine to hold and which aren't.

No it doesn't. Moderation/curation doesn't make BigFooty analogous to the NYT as a "publisher".

You can moderate a forum to remain within your TOS and particularly within the law but at some point a line is crossed. Bottom line for this website is it is on its way to becoming a left wing sh*t tip where chief will constantly need to up his virtue to stay out of the sights of the mob meanwhile it'll be dead as a place for political discussion soon enough.

See above.

You've got no idea what you're talking about. As usual.

You know this but you like to play word games or you don't which means I overestimate you.

Nonsense. You guys peddle a RW talking point that promotes an outdated dichotomy.

The reality is that forums or social media platforms are neither publishers in the traditional sense or mere utilities, like phone companies.

That's why the dichotomy is outdated. Yet you try to shoehorn them into an outdated cateogory of "publisher" because you think it gives you grounds to complain about bias online.

You arent worth the time

I'm right though, aren't I?

You are regurgitating a RW talking point you've heard elsewhere - cultivated to build a complaint against perceived bias online - but you don't actually have any footing when it comes to this subject matter. You can't respond to the most obvious challenges to your position because you've never considered your position beyond the opening talking point.

Are you a publisher? You curate social media feeds and post content here. So are you a publisher?

 

[Poor Form]

No it doesn't. Moderation/curation doesn't make BigFooty analogous to the NYT as a "publisher".

See above.

You've got no idea what you're talking about. As usual.

Nonsense. You guys peddle a RW talking point that promotes an outdated dichotomy.

In the US they had a special law carved out to exempt them from the responsibility of publishers. Evidently there is enough similarity for such a protection to be written in.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

In the US they had a special law carved out to exempt them from the responsibility of publishers. Evidently there is enough similarity for such a protection to be written in.

Yeah, and the RW crybaby talking point is that they are in fact publishers because "wah wah they censor us!"

That's your grievance but it doesn't make the claim accurate.

You are wedded to an outdated dichotomy between platform/publisher. That's not operable the way it was 50 years ago.

 

[Balls In]

You're regurgitating talking points while having no grasp of the topic you're pretending to discuss. As usual.

This is just silly business

 

[Sweet Jesus]

This is just silly business

How many times do you need to come up short before the penny drops for you?

 

[Balls In]

How many times do you need to come up short before the penny drops for you?

And yet here we are. Govts in both Australia and the US in the past 24 hours have both legislated towards reigning in the issues I flagged just 48 hours ago. Im like Nostrodamis just quietly. Over to you, how can you get it so wrong so often?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

And yet here we are. Govts in both Australia and the US in the past 24 hours have both legislated towards reigning in the issues I flagged just 48 hours ago. Im like Nostrodamis just quietly. Over to you, how can you get it so wrong so often?

Which legislation was passed in the last 24 hours?

Can you provide a link?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

And yet here we are.

With you regurgitating talking points and advertising you've got NFI.

Yeah, I know. It's standard.

Your complaint is about social media firms "censoring" RW views. You've been told that argument is worth making but you haven't bothered to understand the details needed to make it.

Every time you weigh in, it becomes immediately clear that you don't know what you're talking about. Why is that? Why are you so dumb?

 

[Poor Form]

With you regurgitating talking points and advertising you've got NFI.

Yeah, I know. It's standard.

Your complaint is about social media firms "censoring" RW views. You've been told that argument is worth making but you haven't bothered to understand the details needed to make it.

Every time you weigh in, it becomes immediately clear that you don't know what you're talking about. Why is that? Why are you so dumb?

Your still at this peach of "oh that's what you think? You have NFI"

I'd say I'm amazed you are not banned but that just proves the arbitrary nature of some moderators and reinforces the fact that you can say whatever you want in defence of the "correct" cause on this... publishers site.

 

[Chief]

Bigfooty like many platforms is wading into publisher territory as it arbitrarily determines which opinions are fine to hold and which aren't.

Nope. Law passed in 1996 says otherwise.

1996! Could you please catch up with information that is almost a quarter of a century old?

kthxbye

Communications Decency Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Through the so-called Good Samaritan provision, this section also protects ISPs from liability for restricting access to certain material or giving others the technical means to restrict access to that material."

 

[Poor Form]

Nope. Law passed in 1996 says otherwise.

1996! Could you please catch up with information that is almost a quarter of a century old?

kthxbye

Communications Decency Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Through the so-called Good Samaritan provision, this section also protects ISPs from liability for restricting access to certain material or giving others the technical means to restrict access to that material."

Section 230 literally exist so that you don't have to be the arbiter of the information posted on your platform you only have to remove illegal things beyond that it is your choice. I missed the part where supporting a conservative was illegal maybe link that bill for me? You don't need to censor people posting memes, you don't need to ban every Trump supporter from the Trump thread you (or your chosen champions) choose to make your platform such. So the debate which is being had in regards to the rights of facebook et al. to censor conservatives takes in to account that yes they are currently permitted to do so (although that is proving dubious) but that perhaps new legislation is required to change the game.

The primary issue is how they choose to ban and it is clear that it has an ideological bend to it. Just like here on this board.

kthxhi

 

[Chief]

Section 230 literally exist so that you don't have to be the arbiter of the information posted on your platform you only have to remove illegal things beyond that it is your choice. I missed the part where supporting a conservative was illegal maybe link that bill for me? You don't need to censor people posting memes, you don't need to ban every Trump supporter from the Trump thread you (or your chosen champions) choose to make your platform such. So the debate which is being had in regards to the rights of facebook et al. to censor conservatives takes in to account that yes they are currently permitted to do so (although that is proving dubious) but that perhaps new legislation is required to change the game.

The primary issue is how they choose to ban and it is clear that it has an ideological bend to it. Just like here on this board.

kthxhi

Who is stopping you from holding an opinion? You feeling oppressed?

 

[Poor Form]

Who is stopping you from holding an opinion? You feeling oppressed?

I think Mal banned me from the trump thread. Idk didn't tell me why I was thread banned so maybe I was inciting violence.

No one stops people holding an opinion (yet) but plenty of people stop them sharing it.

 

[Chief]

I think Mal banned me from the trump thread. Idk didn't tell me why I was thread banned so maybe I was inciting violence.

No one stops people holding an opinion (yet) but plenty of people stop them sharing it.

Nobody stops people from sharing their opinion about Trump, but it is the way people do it that gets them in trouble.

It's mainly that the Trump supporters are FAR more likely to be trolling, making racist comments, abusing people and so on.

Then they cop abuse back, cards etc and whine about being shouted down or "cancelled".

Stop whining and act better around other people.

 

[Mofra]

My posting privileges to Jordy's Corner have been cancelled, so clearly the answer is yes.

 

[bourbons]

My posting privileges to Jordy's Corner have been cancelled, so clearly the answer is yes.

We were just starting to class the place up too

 

[Poor Form]

Nobody stops people from sharing their opinion about Trump, but it is the way people do it that gets them in trouble.

It's mainly that the Trump supporters are FAR more likely to be trolling, making racist comments, abusing people and so on.

Then they cop abuse back, cards etc and whine about being shouted down or "cancelled".

Stop whining and act better around other people.

But I actually was cancelled from that thread. Before I did I was having to bat away 5 posts for each one of mine some vitriolic for even a Luke warm trump supporting post. Yet I got banned without a reason given I don't care that much but that's how it went down.

Regardless I think you're on a hiding to nothing by turning into an echo chamber here at SRP, I presume eventually we will only be allowed to support Carlton on the main board.

 

[Chief]

I presume eventually we will only be allowed to support Carlton on the main board.

Thanks for the idea!

 

[FireKrakouer]

My posting privileges to Jordy's Corner have been cancelled, so clearly the answer is yes.

I wanted you guys there yo. It's cancelled for all of us.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I wanted you guys there yo. It's cancelled for all of us.

Nah it works for me

 

[Chief]

Section 230 literally exist so that you don't have to be the arbiter of the information posted on your platform you only have to remove illegal things beyond that it is your choice.

No. You don’t understand what that law means.

If someone is telling you what you’re posting here, they either don’t know or they are lying for whatever purpose suits them.

 

[Chief]

My posting privileges to Jordy's Corner have been cancelled, so clearly the answer is yes.

And not before time! You’re the worst of the neo-Nazi goblins! Out! Out! Out damn Mof!

 

[Mofra]

And not before time! You’re the worst of the neo-Nazi goblins! Out! Out! Out damn Mof!

Those Antifa nazis are the worst. Damn anti-fascist facists

 

[EasternTiger]

Point of personal privilege, if I may.

The constant use of RWNJ in caps gives me anxiety. I saw it used today and it took me 30 minutes to align my chakras again.

Can we soften down to rwnj?

 

[FireKrakouer]

Those Antifa nazis are the worst. Damn anti-fascist facists

It did just happen to get nuked the day after you arrived. Snitch much!?