The internet takeover thread

[Fife]

This is acceptable on Twitter

So, what's to be done about it? And by who?

[SuburbanFarmer]

[SuburbanFarmer]

This is acceptable on Twitter

So, what's to be done about it? And by who?

Looks like Free Speech, to me.

[pineapplemike]

This is acceptable on Twitter

So, what's to be done about it? And by who?

https://gab.ai

[Okeefenokee]

It's literally incitement of violence.

[Fife]

It's literally incitement of violence.

That's debatable, but let's grant that it is. Is the criminal the poster or @Jack? Who gets prosecuted here?

[Fife]

This is acceptable on Twitter

So, what's to be done about it? And by who?

https://gab.ai

https://gab.ai/Fife

I haven't been on there in a while. They seemed to stall out when they really ramped up the monetization efforts. Looks like a tough business.

What's your handle? (and anyone else here?)

I've looked at Minds.com and set up a profile but I can't make much sense of it yet.

Anyway, monopoly-schmopoly.

[Okeefenokee]

It's literally incitement of violence.

That's debatable, but let's grant that it is. Is the criminal the poster or @Jack? Who gets prosecuted here?

The poster is primarily responsible for his tweet. Not unlike someone instigating a riot, directing a prospect to commit a crime for initiation, ordering a mob hit, etc. The person directing the criminal act is responsible for it as well as the person carrying it out.

Jack would be liable when the family of the victim comes to clean him out, seeing as he decides what is and isn't appropriate on his site, and he let that tweet stay up. Do the consequences for publishers involve criminality?

[SuburbanFarmer]

It's literally incitement of violence.

That's debatable, but let's grant that it is. Is the criminal the poster or @Jack? Who gets prosecuted here?

The poster is primarily responsible for his tweet. Not unlike someone instigating a riot, directing a prospect to commit a crime for initiation, ordering a mob hit, etc. The person directing the criminal act is responsible for it as well as the person carrying it out.

Jack would be liable when the family of the victim comes to clean him out, seeing as he decides what is and isn't appropriate on his site, and he let that tweet stay up. Do the consequences for publishers involve criminality?

Should we set up an identity-verification system to ensure that he can’t just say his account was hacked? Perhaps a state-run “online identity system”?

[Okeefenokee]

You could start by taking down the tweet, dumbass.