Replies: 21
| visibility 1
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13156]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14149
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Yikes. DeSantis loses BIG in court.
May 23, 2022, 1:40 PM
|
|
So, this means that men CAN get pregnant??
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Yikes. DeSantis loses BIG in court.
May 23, 2022, 1:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13156]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14149
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Yikes. DeSantis loses BIG in court.
May 23, 2022, 1:47 PM
|
|
^^^^ winner. President elect DeSantis set a trap.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10900]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15072
Joined: 8/6/10
|
LOL, sure.***
May 23, 2022, 2:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
Re: You don't understand Section 230. But nice try.***
May 23, 2022, 2:16 PM
|
|
"When you’re not just moderating based on your TOS and you’re actively promoting content, censoring content, and using hidden algorithms to limit opposing viewpoints, then you’re a publisher."
This is wrong. This is not reflected in the article you posted. And given this is the central premise of your argument, I again emphasize you do not understand Section 230.
Here's the sauce:
This is from Sen. Ron Wyden, who, literally, wrote the bill: "There's not a single word in Section 230 that requires neutrality….The point was essentially to let ‘lots of flowers bloom.’ If you want to have a conservative platform, more power to you...If you want to have a progressive platform, more power to you."
Link: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/04/eff-30-protecting-free-speech-senator-ron-wydenEFF at 30: Protecting Free Speech, with Senator Ron Wyden To celebrate 30 years of defending online freedom, EFF welcomed Senator Ron Wyden, a longtime supporter of digital rights and a well-recognized champion of free speech as co-author of Section 230, one of the key pieces of legislation protecting expression online.
This is from the court's opinion today: "We conclude that social-media platforms’ content-moderation activities—permitting, removing, prioritizing, and deprioritizing users and posts—constitute “speech” within the meaning of the First Amendment. All but one of S.B. 7072’s operative provisions implicate platforms’ First Amendment rights and are therefore subject to First Amendment scrutiny."
Link: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202112355.pdf
You are:
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: You don't understand Section 230. But nice try.***
May 23, 2022, 2:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
I've posted how you are wrong.
May 23, 2022, 2:26 PM
|
|
Provided evidence how you are wrong.
Even cited the man who wrote the bill, proving you are wrong.
But you have every right to remain being wrong because this is America and that's never stopped anyone before.
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I've posted how you are wrong.
May 23, 2022, 2:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
Oh okay! I got it. Hypothetically you are correct!
May 23, 2022, 3:09 PM
|
|
Mark that one as a big win for you. But in its current state...
CONGRESS has already decided you're wrong. The bill's author says so.
COURTS have already decided you're wrong. The decision today (and some others) say so.
But sure. By golly, if congress changes things up with new bills or amendments to the existing wording you have a #### fine shot at being right! Good luck!
(PS, the absolute cherry on top was you posting a source doc that in no way mentioned your argument. I'm going to glow on that one for at least the next five minutes.)
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
Addendum: The reason I didn't "debate" the Disney comment
May 23, 2022, 3:12 PM
|
|
was because it was a dig at you nuts for associating some irrelevant court decision as "win." There is, of course, no tie to Disney, just as there was, of course, no relevance to DeSantis' "win" against three people who had no standing.
Keep up.
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Addendum: The reason I didn't "debate" the Disney comment
May 23, 2022, 3:17 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
Redoing this reply because you haven't earned the cop-out.
May 23, 2022, 3:20 PM
|
|
You are actually wrong again. The appeals court decision does matter, insofar as until a higher court takes up the case and vacates the position, the essence of the bill is dead. DEAD.
Will that change? Possibly, but the law's statutory construction (made pretty clear by comments of the authors), and the decision today, would suggest you're fighting an uphill battle. But go ahead hang your hat on the hypothetical that one day you may be right in the future, if that helps alleviate the sting of being continuously wrong in the present.
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Okayyyyy
May 23, 2022, 3:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
Yeah? You're still wrong.***
May 23, 2022, 3:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42197]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38274
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Yikes. DeSantis loses BIG in court.
May 23, 2022, 1:47 PM
|
|
I post this only for the DeSantis cheerleaders who think they win when he "wins":
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
alley
May 23, 2022, 1:49 PM
|
|
oop
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7155]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: Yikes. DeSantis loses BIG in court. Troll bait worked
May 24, 2022, 12:22 AM
|
|
Well, you sure had fun with the troll-bait post.
Of course the Disney / Desantis matter had zero to do with the 'comparison cases' which you had cited.
Whatever Desantis' motives were, his legal action to have a special tax district / special competitive advantage vs. non-Disney entertainment venue competitors allows him to legally discontinue that 'special tax district' privilege for Disney in 2023.
The other examples of companies being platforms or publishers are irrelevant to the Diseny / Desantis matter.
But congrats ... you hooked several fish (both the Disney lovers and Desantis lovers) with the post.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15706
Joined: 1/26/22
|
You're my white whale, Danny.
May 24, 2022, 8:56 AM
|
|
One of these days imma getcha.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 21
| visibility 1
|
|
|