🐷 Ethan Oliver Ralph / TheRalphRetort / Rad Roberts / Jcaesar187 / Rage Pig / "Killstream" / "Tequila Sunrise" - 5'1'' fat alcoholic, owner of a gunt, convicted felon and revenge pornographer, property of the ugly failed tranny pornstar Lucas Roberts. Has quadruple titties.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sonork said:
I know, that's why i mentioned that other states do, it isn't the only state that has a similar ruling but they all apply the same reasoning, that they're considered public spaces. I think it's only like 5 or 6 states that do.
Click to expand...
which is consistent with the wording from those state's constitutions, hence why i'd like to see someone bring a state case against twitter in california or something because i think they might actually have a chance.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Rip_In_Pepperino
Sheryl Nome said:
they've been protected as a public forum by recent rulings, which means they are more like a mall, not a billboard (social media specifically), nobody has successfully sued because the current precedent is very much against them, which is what i was getting at.
Click to expand...
Links? I mean, I'd like to read the details.

Although I'm skeptical about malls too. Like, I would imagine that's more of an offhand, expostfacto sorta decision. Like if someone was intentionally wanting to build a mall but retain stronger first amendment control over it, I doubt there's anything inherent keeping them from doing it. The best the government could do is just deny them a building permit.

The reason I say this is because the strongest anti discrimination law is the Civil Rights Act (and state analogs). And that conspicuously omits political views. I think if a real estate developer approached a municipality and handled the paperwork properly, they'd be in the clear and the courts couldn't say boo about it.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Apteryx Owenii and Rip_In_Pepperino
Marvin said:
Links? I mean, I'd like to read the details.

Although I'm skeptical about malls too. Like, I would imagine that's more of an offhand, expostfacto sorta decision. Like if someone was intentionally wanting to build a mall but retain stronger first amendment control over it, I doubt there's anything inherent keeping them from doing it. The best the government could do is just deny them a building permit.

The reason I say this is because the strongest anti discrimination law is the Civil Rights Act (and state analogs). And that conspicuously omits political views. I think if a real estate developer approached a municipality and handled the paperwork properly, they'd be in the clear and the courts couldn't say boo about it.
Click to expand...
if you wanted to build a mall, you could do whatever you want, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd_Corp._v._Tanner protects malls (and other private property that are publicly open), by allowing them to moderate those forums and kick out those who do things they find unacceptable, be it hate speech or proseyltization.

Thats current controlling law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packingham_v._North_Carolina

This case, defines Amazon, facebook, webmd and others as protected public forums under the 1st amendment, meaning the state cannot say "You cannot access social media because you are a registered sex offender."
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL, registereduser, Cat Menagerie and 6 others
the 'private company' argument is getting really tiresome and tone-deaf. tech corporations are becoming so large and influential that the distinction between 'private' and 'public' is becoming less and less meaningful. the law and the public understanding of the influence of these corporations needs to be updated.

in some ways, they have more power than the government could even dream of having. in other ways, they are servants of the government. in still other ways, the government acts as servants of theirs.

bottomline is that only the most delusional lolbertarian would be comfortable with handwaving away the behavior of google and facebook with a 'muh private company' at this point
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Dumb
Reactions: Gig Bucking Fun, BuckBumble, ChromaQuack and 41 others
My biggest issue is that this is starting to set a precedent for, “your money’s no good here.” Pretty soon it’s not just gonna be deplatforming from sites, it’s gonna be China-esque sesame scores in the US and you could be denied goods and services based on political/religious/whatever affiliation.
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Optimistic
Reactions: NSA, Abominacione, DatBepisTho and 15 others
Sir Auroras said:
:story: Holy shit, I thought I was in kiwi farms not ResetEra. What are you doing here, buddy? You're way off the reservation.

Or way out of 4chan... Straight up trolling.
Click to expand...

I don't know what number rule it is, but Kiwi Rule: Do not feed the pet abbo (unless it's gasoline, in which case he'll just huff it from a paper bag lol).

Al Gulud said:
When did this thread become a place for faggots to whine about their free speech? I thought we were making fun of ralph and his problems.
Click to expand...

I mean, this is a problem for Ralph, a big problem.

HarvurdChikee said:
last night, when all the ibs faggots on twitter were in a euphoric trance over ralph on dlive, i wanted to abort myself. i refused to see how a bunch of dumbshits could honestly believe that ralph moving to some bumfuck streaming outpost would destroy youtube. as today went on though, i really admire that opitimism. the msm isnt going away unless someone puts up a fight. and im really glad people are actually trying to put up that fight. it might not be today that the battle is won, but tomorrows tomorrow might bring victory to the war.
Click to expand...

I don't think it was them going, "YEAH, WE'RE GUNNA STICK IT TO 'EM NOW," but more so "YEAH, WE GOT SERVICE AGAIN. EAT A DICK, WSJ." At least, for me it was, lol.

You saw it last night, a quarter of his subscriber base (or a lot of rubber neckers) - which was over 20,000, mind you- followed him to some no name streaming site, wherein they made the site crash due to the amount of traffic. What was it, 6 Sargons?
And that was the same day he gets onto Info Wars and how many people do they cater to? 2+ million?

A Discord server mainly full of edgy autists acting like seress bissnss far righters ain't doing jack, but the further the news radiates outward, the higher a chance that some big name conservative picks it up and runs with it until normies eventually see it on their Facebook feed.
At that point, MSM has no choice but to look, too.

Because reporting such a scandal will draw in viewers, which the MSM needs badly.

I mean come on, if you were a normie and heard that the WSJ pressured St. Judes into returning $26,000 because it came from an edgy no-name livestream, which was earlier wiped off multiple platforms, wouldn't you be tbe least bit interested?
 
  • Like
  • Autistic
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Mankirk, DatBepisTho, xX_rAcE_wAr_420_Xx and 8 others
It's important to remember that Jeff Sessions is busily looking into an anti trust case against silicon valley. The fact that they seem so comfortable doing trust like behavior knowing that shows their willful stupidity or lack of concern. This would not be like the Microsoft case either. This would be like when Feds took on Standard Oil and the Railroads. (United States v. Standard Oil company of New Jersey, 1911)

In some respects the case has some similarities. Standard Oil was the focus, but their anti competitive activity required collusion by other corporations like the railroads to shut out competition. These companies were also ruthless in their application of private property protections to keep dissent silenced. The railroads in particular were particularly nasty and there were many incidents where private security contractors working for the railroads shot at protesting workers. Today we could think of Google as standard oil, being the primary engine driving the industry, and the railroads as the various ISPs supporting the enterprise and the platforms as the "company towns" that Standard Oil and the Railroads used to create weird exceptions to constitutional protections like due process and the right to speak and assemble.

It's not a perfect comparison, but it's one that could be made. Sessions can't just nuke google. Silicon valley is showing itself to be one unified and anti competitive entity that if not unified in practice is definitely unified in spirit of purpose. It is classic trust like behavior and we have not seen it to such an extent in over a century.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Abominacione, Bob's Fries, Mankirk and 25 others
Seeing Ralph and the gang lose their channels and streamlab accounts really worries me. YouTube, The Journalist from the WSJ, David Shitrat and people like him are destroying the mean, dirty, nasty, free and funny internet we all know and love. Within our lifetimes the internet will likely become even more sanitizted and fake purged of all the non NPC friendly stuff that NPCs, governments, and advertisers don't want around.

With how edgy and advertiser UN-friendly the killstream audience and guests are towards YouTube's bottom line I'm not going to pretend to be surprised. But, FUCK the WSJ for being a cog in the machine that is destroying the free and open internet!

I'm glad The Killstream went out on YouTube doxing and mocking the shit of the reporter who wrote the hit piece on them. Similar to dying on their shield like a true shitposter should! I Hope Ralph can keep his Online Radio show alive and if not because he can't find a site with the needed infrastructure I'd still listen if he released a podcast too.
 
  • Feels
  • Dumb
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Abominacione, Bob's Fries, Begemot and 7 others
Dynastia said:
The majority of leftists I see are perfectly reasonable, civil and decent people. Maybe you shouldn't let screeching mentally ill cunts on twitter convince you they're some kind of majority just because they're loud online and you never leave the house?
Click to expand...
I don't know, I think doxxing is funny so we should just dox them.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: skeng, zedkissed60, heathercho and 1 other person
Dynastia said:
The majority of leftists I see are perfectly reasonable, civil and decent people. Maybe you shouldn't let screeching mentally ill cunts on twitter convince you they're some kind of majority just because they're loud online and you never leave the house?
Click to expand...

The hysterical crazies become the politicians regardless of where they are on the autism & political spectrums so they are an issue.
 
  • Agree
  • Optimistic
Reactions: The Nameless One and Done
Dynastia said:
The majority of leftists I see are perfectly reasonable, civil and decent people. Maybe you shouldn't let screeching mentally ill cunts on twitter convince you they're some kind of majority just because they're loud online and you never leave the house?
Click to expand...
Should we instead let the screeching mentally ill cunts that go to rallies and protests convince us they're some kind of majority? That behavior isn't exactly confined to safe spaces online.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: DatBepisTho and The Nameless One
Cland said:
Should we instead let the screeching mentally ill cunts that go to rallies and protests convince us they're some kind of majority? That behavior isn't exactly confined to safe spaces online.
Click to expand...
i think we should get them deplatformed, destroy their sources of revenue, and inform them that its not censorship, its just a private company (tm) and it can do whatever it wants
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: The Ralphacat, Abominacione, Mankirk and 15 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back