Posted on 02/21/2018 9:25:01 AM PST by AU72
Twitter is saying: “We have a league, kind like the NFL, except political discussion is the big game. The referees are on the side of liberals. Join the political discussion today! Talk to people who will never agree with you anyway. But don’t go very far right or we will ban you.”
And now they are forcing you to censor yourself, little by little, or be banned.
No thanks.
Followed your link....
but unable to see a thing other than the “LOG IN” request. Of course, to LOG IN, one would find the necessity of ‘joining’. NO THANKS. I’ll be more than happy to take you at your word.
And, thank you, for your contributions to THIS site, here.
They should be *FORCED* to serve everyone who sits at their lunch counter.
When going up against the big boys, operating in “their” domain, you better have reviewed all their patents to avoid infringement lawsuits. Hell, it may not matter anyway; they’ll simply sue because they have deep pockets.
No more so than a right to be served at a lunch counter.
Facebook has gone from "cutting edge" to "archaic" in less than five or six years.
Whatever happened to Friendster and MySpace, anyway?
I am forcing them to live by the rules they attempt to force on others. I think one of the best ways to turn around advocates of big government is to have big government beat the sh*t out of them, and then they will understand why it is a bad idea to have big government.
Get off Twitter and lower its revenues until it gets fair.
Not effective enough. They need to be chopped off at the knees with any means by which we can accomplish it.
I see the overwhelming dominance of sjws in the tech as a microcosm. Conservatives stood by and let leftists take over education, entertainment, the corporations etc, to the point where they pretty much now dominate the leadership of most influential societal institutions. And then think that whining about it after the fact will change anything. Similarly conservatives stood by and let leftwing politics sweep the tech sector for decades and now expect these giant Bay Area monopolies to treat them fairly. Politics is all out war, yet the vast bulk of the right continues to believe simply casting a ballot and going home to complain to other conservatives on an internet forum is all there is to it.
Not only that, should Twitter and the like be selected to serve a “public function” such as early warnings for public benefit as related to health and welfare, mass notifications of harmful public-related events/incidences, etc., they may be forced to “behave” according to public laws in those instances. So the tail may come to wag the dog. :-)
I don’t see it but you are a great commenter so I wish you well with your efforts.
Some damage to Twitter might be accomplished through the legal system, but I am in favor of damaging it and other communications systems controlled by the left, with whatever tools may be available.
In my mind, the point is to destroy their ability to censor, and I will likely support any reasonable plan for doing so.
Wouldn't it be the same interest that conservatives have to place political ads in the New York Times or the Washington Post?
Do these newspapers have unilateral power to reject ads from candidates they don't like?
-PJ
How do you suggest conservatives take over political opposition, on FB, Twitter, etc?
With their leftist mods/administrators, especially. It’s not an even playing field.
Apologies if you’ve already explained these suggestions. On a phone and limited viewing scope.
Yes, IIRC, these papers have rejected conservative ads, in the past.
“Slightly off topic but perhaps related: Where is Lou Dobbs?”
Strange isn’t it. No explanation is given other than ‘Sitting in for my friend Lou Dobbs”. He is on Twitter but doesn’t respond to questions of his absence.
It is how the digital data is processed and handled, not necessarily the content itself. I have not checked, but many of the early companies sold out to the big boys who bought their IP and roared passed them. I suspect that is why some users here say that Gab is not too user friendly—Gab may have had to take design steps that avoid such “attention”. But I am with you for any designers/developers on our side who can make these sites and enable us to block the left from participating. Tit for tat!
What would the broadcasting infrastructure for a corporation like ABC cost? Would it be 100 billion?
I don't have 100 billion in my pocket, but I have a dire need to prevent the public from being misled into doing things that will threaten my life in the future. Things like electing a mouthy, arrogant, affirmative action idiot because the "News" people said he was a brilliant genius.
What you seem to be suggesting is that we're too stupid or disinterested to do that, so we have to force Facebook and Twitter into public utilities.
I'm saying that allowing one party to control communications is a recipe for our destruction. I'm saying that I will look favorably upon any means we can find to stop one party control of communications to the American people.
If we can get results that are obtainable within our philosophical framework, then I am happy to do so, but my bottom line is that allowing monopoly control on the means of communicating with the American people is a dire threat to our lives.
If we must go outside of our philosophical framework to accomplish this, then necessity compels.
-PJ
Forget about ads. How about buying the New York Times or the Washington Post?
I thought I read somewhere that Newsweek sold for $1 recently. I'm sure I could have scraped together four spare quarters for it, if I thought it was a worthwhile avenue for political messaging.
No thanks.
No, we don't want to be part of it, but not being part of it does not change it's effect on people who are part of it.
You can't let rabble rousers stir mobs to violence because you are too dignified to confront them where they operate. If they are going to stir trouble against us, we should be trying to cut them off at the knees.
The Jews didn't stop Hitler from making speeches against them, and those who listened to Hitler's speeches ended up doing his evil bidding.
We cannot allow wannabe Hitlers to have a one sided conversation with America, lest we find ourselves fighting for our very lives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.