Quote (GLYC123 @ Feb 4 2019 11:50am)
Just because I don't agree with an opinion, doesn't mean that I don't see the value in being able to see it or for others to be able to express it.
How you express it, does matter. However, I'm curious what some of these expressions actually looked like.
It's a bad thing when you force an objective on others. I would prefer to be able to think for myself rather than have a company force an agenda on me.
So I understand why people are questioning this. Right now if it's Twitter, what happens when that keeps expanding, and it's never questioned?
Now every major media outlet controls what you see? I just don't see that as a good thing.
My personal opinion is pro speech that isn't a direct inciting of violence and/or harassment no matter how much I disagree with it
For example if it were my site I would have banned Kathy Griffin and those like her
but my personal opinion doesn't matter because I'm not a twitter member and I don't own the site
They can ban whoever they want and whether I like them or don't I don't care
Having vague rules and the power of discretion literally allows wiggle room for almost 100% for any penalty put on an account
Twitter or any company doesn't have to let any of these people run their mouths. You guys are free to protest or stop using it but the cries of unfairness are silly. Every site is unfair, there is no such thing as fairness
No matter what Jack does people will complain. They will complain if he goes back on Rogan 50 more times and answers every single question.
The -law and order- pretenders are now advocating for unaccountable use of someone else's platform where the people have broken the rules they agreed to.