[semimojo]

Only because we don't have any laws prohibiting such anti-competitive behavior.

Exactly how big does FR have to get before you say Jim can no longer ban posters?

I do not think that big tech should have the right to basically ban you from the internet.

Neither do I. Luckily no one’s trying to do that.

You aren’t saying I have a right to publish my content for free on a platform that someone else created and paid for, are you?

You think Facebook will lose its private property rights if they can no longer...

Yes, by definition.

1st Amendment principles that say, "you can't ban this speech unless it represents an imminent threat to someone"?

Tell that to Jim.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Exactly how big does FR have to get before you say Jim can no longer ban posters?

Exactly how BIG does FR have to get before google or GoDaddy or whoever decides they won't host our "Neo-Nazi" web forum, as they, and hundreds of other registrars, do to actual racist websites all the time.

They are calling Alex Jones a Neo-Nazi right now. Even saw a tweet by Howard Dean calling Jones a Nazi.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

BTW, I forgot to reply to your main point, which is the implication that if we regulate facebook, we'll have to regulate Free Republic. Actually, the reason why normal businesses face discrimination lawsuits, and groups like churches, or the Boyscouts do not, but then some other social groups can and HAVE been sued for refusing to let women work for them or join them, is because the Courts recognize a group that is made for a certain class/type of people versus organizations that for religious or political reasons restrict membership only to men or to people of a specific religion.

Free Republic would be protected under the First Amendment. Facebook, which promotes itself as a free and open social space to all people, would not.