Twitter Hides POTUS Tweet

The Last Stand said:
By that logic, is the raw footage of Vietnam from reporters "glorified violence?"
Click to expand...

Well, different category. That's clearly in the scope of reporting. Trump, on the other hand, is making a threat. But the threat is clearly to quell illegal action (looting), and can't sanely be considered "glorifying violence".
 
Coh said:
It doesn't matter to me so....
Plus, wouldn't threatening national parks threaten the local economies of the nearby areas? I'm pretty sure most of those places only really exist BECAUSE of the fact that national parks are there.
Click to expand...
Are you blonde per chance? Or under the age of 20?
 
  • Islamic Content
  • Like
Reactions: Carole Baskin, Swiss46, F/lying Frankenstein and 1 other person
I would assume the EFF will put out some kind of call to arms with how to contact representatives and stuff shortly, hopefully that will get more peoples attention.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Kot Johansson
Zero Day Defense said:
Well, different category. That's clearly in the scope of reporting. Trump, on the other hand, is making a threat. But the threat is clearly to quell illegal action (looting), and can't sanely be considered "glorifying violence".
Click to expand...
Just admit you will still suck Daddy Trump cock even when he is killing orphans.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Mostly Here For Lurking, Hollywood Hulk Hogan, Zero Day Defense and 1 other person
Null said:
It will, and if you're too dense to read the law to understand how, you'll get what you fucking deserve.
Click to expand...
Why do you even still have a glimmer of hope in your trash illiterate userbase?

Even if they read the law their reptilian brains will fail to grasp any discernible consequence, even if the worst happen and the internet becomes a barren distopia they will be too distracted by stupid shit to notice the difference.

Don't waste your time trying ot make them understand something they're not mentally qualified to, just think that there's a chance 230 gets removed and also there's a chance that it will remain untouched.

And do what you have to do later instead of chimping like a sperg in this thread.
 
  • Autistic
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Dumb
Reactions: Star Stuff, northstar747, Syntaxion and 11 others
I'm fairly sure that none of the big social media players are even sweating over this (not only because they're reptiles), because they recognize this as a poor attempt to bluff. One of the most basic negotiation strategies is to ask for the impossible and negotiate a deal down the middle. Trump is trying to get the big players to come to the negotiation table by threatening them. Null has been 4D chessed, while people like Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey are too smart to bite the bait.
 
  • Like
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Ira the Weatherman, Syntaxion, bara keemstar and 4 others
Someone who understands Trump please explain the logic behind this. I understand the argument that social media companies aren’t compliant with 230, but how will completely repealing this help with the censorship problem? It seems like removing this protection would encourage censorship on a scale we’ve never seen before.

Is there any logic to be found or is this just him doing anything possible to hurt the company who censored him personally?
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Ira the Weatherman, HanSolo, Caverlock and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back