to be fair..... im against the orwellian tactics of banning those shit bags just b/c they hold the different viewpoints

even the "walk away movement" was banned from fb...

shit, i wouldnt be surprised if the left start calling for fox news/newsmax and other conservative outlets to be removed from the air

never let a crisis go to waste, i suppose

This post was edited by Warlock316 on Jan 9 2021 12:52pm

Eh, if you are referring to the Maricopa subpoena a couple of weeks back, your qualm should be with the Committee that refused to comply, which is predominantly comprised of Republicans. I think their argument is that it is constitutionally wrong to give out private info of millions of voters to some arbitrary "independent" inspector just because the opposition can't fathom their candidate losing. If you perceive that as questionable then that is fine but to outright jump from A to the worst possible outcome is ludicrous, which is what people like darkhead and TiStuff are pushing.

I'm not a republican, so your appeal to partisanship doesn't fly. Let's be clear with that up front.

Forensic analysis is conducted by technical experts who deal with far more than some names of voters. They're the same experts that analyze attempted breaches into the NSA, Banks, etc. They're not concerned with who voted for what, they're concerned if the machine tallies were altered in any way.

I'm not saying your argument is weak, frankly I'm thankful that somebody finally answered the question. But given the question, do you not question it as well? I'm not saying the election should be changed. It's done. Biden is the President as of 01-20-20. However, this question needs to be resolved prior to 2022, would you not agree?

Yes, there's nothing wrong with questioning as long as it's rational and not swiftly jumping to conclusions. I'm confident that there is no foul play and it's more of an ego battle between both parties . It would be nice to see the results however they'll just find some other issue to lament about anyway .

Lol acting like the first amendment grants access to privately owned websites. Come and speak your mind in my office, see how fast you get kicked out and then make a fool of yourself calling the police about how I violated your rights 😂 idiot

See, this is all I've been looking for from the start. Lin Wood is an idiot, the conspiracy theory bullshit is exactly that.

I did not vote for Trump, whoever wins wins. Don't care. I AM legitimately concerned about the Dominion machines. It's a foreign entity involved in our elections. An independt forensic analysis to determine the legitimacy of the vote sounds fantastic. It comes out clean? Fantastic! That would clear up a lot of doubt, not merely for myself, but for many who feel that the votes the DID cast were not accurately counted.

Seems reasonable, yeah? No overturned elections, no bullshit. Nothing.



What horse shit is this? Social media (primarily facebook and twitter) has become the public medium for communication. Think 21st century telephone. I'm not advocating that it's a 1st amendment protection. I'm saying it needs to be considered whether, due to it's commons status for communication is it a utility or not? If it's not a utility, but they are exercising editorial license, should they be treated as a publisher? At least read the argument before talking shit, kiddo.

I have read your argument and you are an idiot, these are PRIVATE companies.

I’m one violation away from being permanently banned on Facebook myself, I chose to follow the rules, it’s not hard to do. It’s obvious however that were you in my position you would have a team of lawyers read to sue over violating your “rights” to post on a private website 🤣

Imagine the violation it is to warn someone on jsp... I can’t be punished for writing what I think!!!

This post was edited by DrFaGgIt on Jan 9 2021 01:59pm

This has already been considered and rejected.

Technically speaking, they are not "private" companies. They're publicly traded. Just as most utilities are, and just as most utilities are not "government owned".

From a personal perspective, I don't care. I don't have a social media account. I'm not interested. It is a purely analytical question. When 3.6 billion people use social media to communicate, has it passed beyond the point of something like a forum and into a public commons, therefore becoming a utility, or not? If not, since they're exercising editorial license in attaching things to people's posts, even private posts, should they be treated as a publisher?



You'll have to expand on this. Social media has been under intense scrutiny for a decade, and no concrete decisions have been made that I'm aware of.

Courts have upheld as recently as last year that private social media companies are not akin to the modern town square. The most recent that I'm aware of was PragerU vs YouTube, which was decided in YouTube's favor on this exact ground.

This isn't something congress can change with a simple law either, since freedom of speech means you can't be forced to host speech you disagree with it would require a constitutional amendment.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jan 9 2021 02:51pm