Free Speech Warrior

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

What you just did there is the opposite of a rational discussion. You got caught in your deceit and instead of admitting the dishonesty, you dishonestly tried to paint the side destroying you as "hyperventilating".

GCF literally blamed a woman for her own violent assault while she stood outside a lecture hall. That is why he got lambasted on this forum.

You came in here stating we do not want consequences for free speech and used that debacle as an example. Therefore, the only logical conclusion one can make is that you find it perfectly reasonable for a federally designated communist terrorist organization to attack people who espouse conservative views or merely attend a lecture said terrorists disagree with.

Those are the "consequences" you defended.

If that is how you read it.

That is the only logical conclusion one can make from your statements, unless you are willing to admit you are mistaken about exactly what GCF got lambasted for on this forum.

If you can 'admit' there is a distinction between a justified consequence and an unsurprising consequence, we can continue.

I don't have the time, energy, or inclination to try to prove I'm not engaging in bad faith about someone else's posts.

[DBTrek]

FB is a self-solving problem. They’ll alienate everyone but SJWs and hackers, and soon be regulating a myopic circle-jerk echo chamber. When the Dems lose again, they’ll blame social media and Russians, maybe shut FB down.
/shrug

[Martin Hash]

On Facebook today, Progressives are finally openly admitting it’s women vs. men. I posted that “I agree, and though I’ll be on the other side, I look forward to the fight.” The thread stopped (or maybe I was locked out? I need to check...)

Got Blocked.

[Speaker to Animals]

Welcome to the club.

[TheReal_ND]

Zuck-cucked

[clubgop]

I agree, and that is where the parity lies, I suppose. An SJW will try to deny a speaker an opportunity to speak beforehand (which is bad), and the FSW believes there shouldn't be negative consequences for speech (which is stupid). To what extent anyone actually believes this... I couldn't say, but some speech is subject to pretty sharply diminishing returns in the marketplace of ideas.

This forum is a pretty good microcosm but I learned my position on Speech from FB where I was brigaded, slandered, restricted & banned. Notice how all of those are all limits on Speech.

The idea that FB was ever a venue for unrestricted speech was always a fantasy.

To put it another way, if I claimed some RIGHT that obliged Penguin or Random House to publish my wildly unpopular rantings, I would probably be accused of being an entitled millennial brat, and rightfully so. Same with FB. Now that the fantasy has been exploded, provocateurs are going to have to go back to funding their own pamphlets without Zuckerbergs help, I guess.

See but this is giving Facebook all the benefits with none of the responsibilities. Penguin and Random House are publishers and are legally liable as such Facebook is not.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

This forum is a pretty good microcosm but I learned my position on Speech from FB where I was brigaded, slandered, restricted & banned. Notice how all of those are all limits on Speech.

The idea that FB was ever a venue for unrestricted speech was always a fantasy.

To put it another way, if I claimed some RIGHT that obliged Penguin or Random House to publish my wildly unpopular rantings, I would probably be accused of being an entitled millennial brat, and rightfully so. Same with FB. Now that the fantasy has been exploded, provocateurs are going to have to go back to funding their own pamphlets without Zuckerbergs help, I guess.

See but this is giving Facebook all the benefits with none of the responsibilities. Penguin and Random House are publishers and are legally liable as such Facebook is not.

Hey, I am a pro deep-state, liberal cuck. I would be very open to letting the government stick its thumb in Facebook's eye by treating them like the publisher they are. I love me some government regulations.

[TheReal_ND]

We will use the state to crush the Zuckerberg menace. Kavanaugh pls ban them.

[clubgop]

FB is a self-solving problem. They’ll alienate everyone but SJWs and hackers, and soon be regulating a myopic circle-jerk echo chamber. When the Dems lose again, they’ll blame social media and Russians, maybe shut FB down.
/shrug

Never met a person who took a break or totally separated from social media that regretted it. One day there will be a collective realization that they need us way more than we ever needed them.

[clubgop]

The idea that FB was ever a venue for unrestricted speech was always a fantasy.

To put it another way, if I claimed some RIGHT that obliged Penguin or Random House to publish my wildly unpopular rantings, I would probably be accused of being an entitled millennial brat, and rightfully so. Same with FB. Now that the fantasy has been exploded, provocateurs are going to have to go back to funding their own pamphlets without Zuckerbergs help, I guess.

See but this is giving Facebook all the benefits with none of the responsibilities. Penguin and Random House are publishers and are legally liable as such Facebook is not.

Hey, I am a pro deep-state, liberal cuck. I would be very open to letting the government stick its thumb in Facebook's eye by treating them like the publisher they are. I love me some government regulations.

Up to and until they bankrupt his ass and then you'll scream like a bitch for a bailout. FB will be TBTF.