I believe the term that I came up with last year to describe the collusion between the state and media companies was “outsourced tyranny”. It was called a “conspiracy theory” by almost all of the users in here. It’s been confirmed that the fbi was closely working with Twitter to silence speech. If you are ok with this, you are a fascist. It’s that simple. In the wake of this Twitter fiasco, I hope archinect sees their role as a social media platform in a new light and reconsiders their culture of censorship. While I understand that archinect is not working with any government authority, they are certainly mirroring larger platforms that are, like Twitter and FB. Change, or go down on the wrong side of history…
You presented something by a source that is potentially questionable. Unless you have all the facts and not just excerpts, it's best to shut the f--- up. The DOJ and FBI isn't policing free speech. If they were, YOU would be in jail because they would have already detected your message here, hacked the server, got the information and back route to you ISP within 15 to 30 minutes of your post, then got your account information from the ISP to your home or office or place of employment within 15-30 after that. If you live anywhere near a major city (within a 30 minute drive to a major city, they will be at your home, office,or place of employment within 1 hour.
It would take FBI a little longer to mobilize an FBI crew to get to me but they would be able to get local resources like local police department or state police for a faster response including provisional use of the local federal border control officer to aid in such then hand over me to FBI if they were to. They can likewise do similarly if it makes any sense for them to apprehend you more quickly. If you live in a big city, they can drop in shock & awe and grab your butt...if they were actually doing such a fascist scheme. That is what an actual Nazi fascist-type regime would be doing in this 21st-century technology age.
If they were actually doing such "fascism" as what the term means with actual historic precedence in mind, you would already be arrested by now since your first post. That would be what the SS would have done. Get your facts straight. Make sure you have all the facts or just exercise your right to STFU and if someone bans you or nukes your posts here, it isn't the FBI or DOJ.
It's would be the site's moderators or the site's owner, who probably don't like you and don't want your spouting b.s. on here... as far as they are going to interpret your statements. Since it is privately owned, it's like you being an unwanted guest getting kicked out of the owner's home. You're in Paul Petrunia's "house" and "office" on the internet. If he or his house "guards" aka "bouncers" don't like you or what you say... thrown out you will be. Get the picture? Get the idea?
The FBI and DOJ don't give a shit about individual free speech. They do give a shit about someone or some foreign interest, interfering with elections in the U.S. and individual(s), foreign and/or domestic, riling up people into committing mass-scale rioting, insurrections/sedition, and such acts of war against the U.S., its member states, and territories. Get your shit straight and clear with all the facts. You don't have an absolute unfettered right to speak or write whatever the f--- you want without the possibility of consequences or prosecution. The founders never intended that at all.
People are free to have their opinion but they aren't free to use speech in a manner with intent to rile people up... inciting and inflaming their anger and emotions, to the extent where a reasonable person can reasonably assume that people in such a crowd or group would go off doing something criminal. You can be sued for liability. You might not get criminal charges but it doesn't mean you can't be liable because no reasonable person can reasonably assume everyone are calm, collective, law-abiding, peaceful people. A reasonable person knows and understands the real world and there are a lot of unhinged and disturbed individuals. Every large mass crowd has some percentage of thos kinds of individuals.
A reasonable person in this age of internet and telecommunication and streaming, knows people don't have to physically be in front of you to listen to your speech when you know you are being recorded and streamed. Donald Trump knew this on Jan. 6th. He's been in "show business" and knows about internet streaming and all even if he doesn't know exactly how the technology works. He knows how to use phone apps like twitter, youtube, and watch something live on his phone. Let's not assume he's totally oblivious. He knew what he was doing.
The confrontation around the first amendment in digital forums is coming. But I don't think the issue is truly what X-jla and many think it is and they are going to be disappointed in how this ends. Elon sees taking this stand as a free speech absolutist as a safe marketing play for his new acquisition. It's no different than the shiny bumper on any other regurgitated tech he has "ushered" forward.
You take a forum, Twitter, Facebook, or Archinect and compare it to a public plaza. It's not. It is a private building built on the back of the public infrastructure. The public plaza is the internet at large if you will. When they throw you out of the building you are still welcome to go shout on the street. Make your own website. Self publish. No one is stopping them. See Truth Social.
Converse to Twitter, Archinect would never have any incentive to allow un-moderated posting. Some heavier moderation would actually and does increase the value of the site by keeping the focus, civil professional and architectural. Which I appreciate.
The moniker Outsourced Tyranny goes more with citizens united in my opinion. The collusion is in the opposite direction. Government (particularly one party) subverting the will of the people by interpreting corporate spending as speech undermines democracy.
More like the government pressuring an airline to not allow a known terrorist to fly. It's for the good of us all. See you have a right to your free speech. But not free speech amplification. You're welcome to go build your own amplifier if you want. Again see truth social. Anyone can shout anything they want to anyone they want and they are not put in jail for it. Stop overreacting. If ideas have actual merit they don't prove themselves out via Twitter.
So you agree there is a need for the government agency to reach out to industry for a matter of life safety? The deep state violating privacy now is your issue? Twitter files that had nothing to do with the invasion of privacy. It's your own boogieman
.
What if grandma is a sponsor of terrorists like being a KKK member? If grandma is connected to terrorist groups, should they not investigate where the evidence is.... even if it is a grandma. It is not always clear. They aren't going to be sifting through grannie's underwear unless there's good probable cause for search warrant. They have to have that to get the search warrant. If there isn't a good reason, of course not. If there is, then yes as with all people REGARDLESS of age or gender.
You can not possibly in this day and age have the security without your internet activity being subject to search. Internet is not private and never is. If you don't want your so-called private conversation being being publically known on the internet, keep it off the internet or keep your thoughts to yourself. You have the right to shut the f--- up. Don't speak or write on the internet unless you are willing to accept that others will hear or read it. It's like talking out loud in a grocery store. While it is open to the public as in public accommodation, it is still a privately owned venue. The internet is like the private buildings and public streets and public parks. It's like a digital city. Like real cities, its a combination of public and private spaces.
The 1st Amendment rights to a limited degree may affect a business (subject to the anti-discrimination laws as they are written) but this doesn't mean the Constitutional rights applies as they would against the government. On a private non-business related site, the Constitution has no place or jurisdiction in the matter just as it would a privately run BBS or some guest being kicked out of someone's home because the person offended the home owner. In Oregon, businesses have this "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". Except for explicitly violation of anti-discrimination laws, anyone can be refused service. Political opinions are not necessarily something protected under anti-discrimination laws.
I am not speaking to all the laws of other states. Then there is the federal law and international (multi-national jurisdiction issues).
Since the internet and social media and platforms based in the U.S. would be subject to U.S. Federal law.... Federal law does grant businesses the right to refuse service to anyone with the caveat that they do not refuse service based on:
Political viewpoints, traditionally, has not been viewed as under "religion or creed" as the terms legislative intent were.
In cases, a particular state law may have jurisdiction. California for example, may apply but in that case, you can't be discriminately merely for being part of member of a political party or partaking in political activities but this mainly applies more strictly to employment discrimination on these grounds.
A person can be banned, not necessarily what their political view is but if they were deemed rude and it's bothering other guests. In essence, on a web forum or a social media platform, users are in every essence, a customer/guest on the platform.
Given this forum is run by an organization/entity of some sort, it may be held to standards applicable to businesses than merely a website/blog of merely a person, it would be best practices for their being clearly established rules of conduct that may constitute disciplinary action and to an extent, and a fairly consistent enforcement/disciplinary policy.
This site appears to have a reference to TOS and that posts maybe deleted and accounts banned such as: "Please be productive, helpful, considerate and smart with your comments. Comments that do not follow the guidelines in our T.O.S. may be deleted. Abuse may lead to account banning." T.O.S. found here: https://archinect.com/forum/thread/1560/
Over the years, the forum has been loose at times on this front by has been improving in ways on this front. A policy guide should be provide to those appointed as moderators providing guidance on how disciplinary actions are made and clarity of reason that a ban - which is within the "right to refuse service" does not violate the laws. All these are things I think is being done or been done and legal review cycles to assure that they have not or are not violating laws with reasonable attempt on legal analysis periodically.
On face value alone, I think the Terms of Service which is also the source for the rules of conduct does not appear to be discriminatory on basis of protected classes based on my unqualified analysis. However, I am not an attorney for the performance of legal analysis which would need to go deeper than just the text but the practices. Having this T.O.S. policy is a good thing for organizations such as Archinect.
You can deny but denial doesn't help you. If they were policing like the fascists you claim them to be, you would already be in a jail cell never to see a court room. You would be tormented, beaten, teased because guess the f--- what, fascist governments are police states controlled by a dictator under perpetual martial law. They don't even have trials. They skip all that and the lawyers. They arrest you then punish you however they want. Even execute you through the horror of atrocities you could not even fathom. You never lived or experienced this.
Frankly, I can refuse service to anyone regarding my own business. I have ran BBSs before. I have banned people before. What punishment do I get for doing that, under law. ZERO. Why?
The first amendments says it: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." I'm not Congress.
It doesn't say, "individuals and businesses shall make no rules respecting an established religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the individual and/or business for a redress of grievances."
The Constitution's FIRST AMENDMENT protects you from Congress of the United States, not censorship by private persons or businesses.
More accurately: The Constitution's FIRST AMENDMENT protects you from Congress of the United States, the United States government, U.S. territorial government & by extension of 14th amendment & state constitution.... state government, and local governments within the states or territories, not censorship by private persons or businesses.
If you did that sedition and were using my forum to conspire such, I would remove your posts from public view, shut down your posting privileges, send all information I can to law enforcement so they can take actions including arresting you and your co-conspirators, and permanently ban your account and your conspirators. Private web forums and social media are not democracies. They NEVER were. Only idiot morons think that. No one is going to host you or provide services to you if you support and sponsor sedition and treason. No business is going to be an accessory party to you or your criminal users, making them liable to your crimes. There's no collusion. It's common fucking sense. Who the hell wants to be sued by the families of those harmed in a seditious riot and be sued in a class-action that may amount to millions of dollars per person that can rise into billions of dollars worth of civil liability. Hell, there's no particular collusion. FBI may have wanted information relating to the seditionists but when the media publishes that Parler was where seditionists were organizing and to an extent planning their act of sedition of attacking the U.S. Capitol. This immediately caused Google, Apple and Amazon taking their own action to disassociate with Parler and its users. The seditionists made Parler "radioactive". Anyone that associates with them and those seditionist users are going to be ripe targets for civil lawsuits. It doesn't take the FBI at all. They were going to do this even if the FBI never contacted them. This would have been something the companies own legal counsel would have suggested the companies directors and executives to take such action. FBI's own role regarding Parler was minimal if any between 1/6/2021 and 1/10/2021. Companies have been held liable under civil court lawsuits for same and other criminal planning happening on their platform or premises for practically a century, already. It's like any one who gives aid, comfort, or otherwise to a person who assassinates a President. Does the name Samuel Mudd ring a bell? Does the phrase, "your name is mud" ring a bell in your head?
The Constitution's FIRST AMENDMENT protects you from Congress of the United States, the United States government, U.S. territorial government and by extension of 14th amendment & state constitution, the state government, and local governments within the states or territories. It does not protect you from censorship by private persons or businesses.
What? You think the FBI and DOJ should simply do nothing as complete and total fucking dereliction of duty and just let seditionists to conspire and on attacking the U.S. Capitol and other targets throught the U.S.???? You don't want a government at all. How about live on a boat in the waters of the ocean outside the jurisdiction of any country and see how well your lif and the life of your family would be when you and your family can be made hostage, slaves, raped and murder.... all without any laws or government to come for your rescue. They didn't collude in the manner you are alluding to.
No one outsources tyranny without a good reason. Additionally, the entire so called "twitter files" released by Elon Musk, himself, can be entirely fabricated bullshit because that can be entirely made up by a single fiction writer in just a week's time and there has been more than enough time since then. Come on? Lets get the people to testify under polygraph and penalty of perjury if they lie.
I would expect law enforcement to make pressing demands to take effort to disrupt the planning of acts of domestic terrorism which is what sedition like the attack on the Capitol is a type of. Every single one of them denounced their citizenship by the act of sedition and not a single one of them should even be afforded rights as a citizen and should be sent to Guantanamo Bay for 24/7 joy of real interrogation not the powder puff candy-coated version of interrogation that you get in normal police stations. Our justice system has been too soft regarding punishment for crimes, for way too long. I don't know where you were on January 6, 2021.
As for my opinion, seditionists should be punished, de-platformed, and prevented from being able to conspire. Solitary confinement for every single one of them. Platforms that aid and abets sedition in order to make a racist, misogynist, assh-le as dictator of the United States, by providing aid and comfort to seditionists to conspire acts of sedition and treason against the United States and its own fellow citizens of the country that they voluntarily gave up their citizenship to do this. You can't be a citizen and be a seditionist/treasonist terrorist.
The only one that "outsourced" tyranny is Donald Trump and his administration and there was a group of un-American asswipes that would do what Trump wants. Keep in mind that Donald Trump is a villain that wanted to be President-dictator for the rest of his life at this point. Already impeached and a name brand that became associated with corrupt and evil so he went all out villain... but not supervillain (he lacks style and presentation). He knew there were militant followers who would do whatever he wants.
He couldn't reliably get an actual active military to do what he wanted to do. He didn't trust the FBI, the DOJ, and judicial branch. The legislative branch would be a problem. Stopping the certification of the electoral votes would not be possible by peaceful lawful protests because they would had to do the protest from over 100 yards away from the Capitol building which means the only way to actually stop the electrol vote certification meant outright attacking the Capitol building and cause the Congress to dispurse.
If they had a choice, they would kill and in some cases rape and kill certain younger members of democrats in Congress because there were those among them that were that despicable. They were against anyone that was anti-Trump. They would force the situation where the President would initiate martial law and suspending the U.S. Constitution and ultimately supplanting it after he had the entire Congress and the Supreme Court killed and then systematically killy off the federal judges... putting the entire control of the U.S. in his hands. This is what the seditionists were trying to do. This was to a degree what Donald Trump wanted as end goal... even if he wasn't entirely on page with the means and methods.
I do believe that FBI was greatly concerned about this radical faction mobilizing another attack. The FBI and DOJ didn't entirely bended to whatever Trump wanted. They were having internal problems between those who actually believed in the oath they take and those Trump appointed that were corrupt. After the November 2020 election, Donald Trump gone mentally disturbed because he lost. He never ever lost in anything because he either legitimately won in cases or he cheated and got away with it. Someone like that is not psychologically and morally fit for serving the United States in any capacity but as a convicted criminal doing community service cleaning up dog shit on the sidewalk.
There's more to that we learned about since January 6, 2021 like the government documents he stole and ran off with as he left. No shit he left early which seemed very odd but given his penchant for doing odd things, it was not noticed but that was exactly what he did. He outright should go to prison. He should never be allowed to serve in any political office anywhere in the U.S.
He should be held personally liable under civil lawsuits for the sedition. I'm not so concerned of him going to prison for January 6, 2021 sedition. The Mar-a-lago case and among other criminal cases involving him and his business should be enough to put him away and then it should be his money and wealth taken away for the harm he done. He should be civilally liable for his treatment of the children in those apprehended be ICE.
Punish the asshole where it hurts... his money, properties, and wealth. Send that misapplied copper-toned (orange) faced, Tribble-haired, corrupt Ferengi asshole to the poor house.
Here's the thing, Turd McGirt, I can believe that Elon is a cuck, and the FBI are assholes, and you still don't know a fucking thing that you haven't been told. You learn nothing, and extrapolate in a fashion that makes Charlie Kelly blush.
A private corporation reliant on popular engagement taking steps to mitigate the visibility of shit-stain provocateurs that drive down engagement is not a scandal unless you're one of the aforementioned shit-stains.
I don't know how to counter this habit the right has of making up some bullshit, screaming about it until someone tells them to fuck off, and then using that response as evidence of a coverup, other than continuing to point out that it's their main strategy.
x-jla, it's not left vs. right. It's that the left is right and the so-called 'right' and especially you, are WRONG. The Republicans are not right. They got rid of those that are right and sensible and went for all the crazies, corrupt, loons and wack job wrong people with nothing but wrong. This is because the Republican party is morally dead because they pushed out those people. They are bought up by the KKK, neo-nazi (aryan nation), neo-Confederates, and white supremacists. That is what the political party is, now. All remaining real Republicans that don't support racism and all that crap should leave that party, TODAY... NOW... if they haven't. They should start a new party and let the GOP go down with these wacky nutjobs and get decertified by the FEC and state elections commissions and be recognized as the terrorist supercell that they have turned the political party into.
".. town squares are public spaces, governed in some way by the public. That is what makes them a town square rather than a square in a town. They are not the playthings of whimsical billionaires. They do not exist, as Twitter did for so long, to provide returns to shareholders. ... A town square controlled by one man isn’t a town square. It’s a storefront, an art project or possibly a game preserve."
The thing is I can almost always guess where your information is coming from because you parrot the catch phrases and talking points to a T in between fevered insistence that you're thinking for yourself. I just like to see you offer up what you think is unbiased truth so everyone else can see that it's mostly 3rd tier right wing opinion pieces and youtube podcasts.
x-jla, you have the perfect batting average of making fouls. Do a real investigation. Get the facts directly from all parties involved. Be a real investigative journalist, then publish. Don't waste our time and your time here. You are going to get your posts removed and no, it won't be because of the GOVERNMENT. It will because you pissed off the moderators if not the site owner like absolutely every single time you had been censored on this forum.
"In fairness, the Twitter Files do show that the company makes amplification decisions about certain accounts. And while that’s not especially revelatory to people who’ve paid attention, the files do speak to the immense power wielded by tech platforms. It’s a power that makes Republicans and Democrats queasy, albeit often in different ways. As content-moderation experts will tell you, it’s a messy system where people can make the wrong call with occasionally disastrous results. In this way, the Twitter Files do what technology critics have long done: point out a mostly intractable problem that is at the heart of our societal decision to outsource broad swaths of our political discourse and news consumption to corporate platforms whose infrastructure and design were made for viral advertising."
Sure but don't you think that it would be the family of the police officers harmed or killed during that insurrection and others harmed that would be suing that is going to be the greater legal risk. What criminal conviction would result in a company actually going to prison? They would only be fined. Companies are legal constructs that are basically forms, and bank accounts. Only people actually can be put in prison. Sure, the government may or may not have exerted any particular "threat" of criminal charges. They may have only requested information and at most threaten obstruction charges if the companies tried to deliberately obstruct. The thing that caused Apple, Google, and Amazon to drop/suspend Parler from their services more likely had nothing to do with the FBI investigation requesting information. I'd bet they'd be more concern with hundreds of people in the U.S. Capitol building that were harmed emotionally/psychologically, injured, or killed and their families suing these companies for billions of dollars. Parler would file bankruptcy whih would have turned those people to suing Apple, Google, and Amazon because they won't so easily file bankruptcy. They would be the purse that has money and that is where the lawyers for these people will go after.
"That’s all correct, but you are leaving out the worst part, that government itself has the power to capture this power. This goes beyond immense corporate power, which in and of itself has some disastrous potential. This is the merger of state and corporate interests. Call it fascism or whatever you want." You leave out the inconvenient truth, any one or any group of people has the power to capture power and ultimately have the power to oppress the world. The problem is, you are making out your personal grievances as if Archinect is part of the great grand COLLUSION to oppress you and those we don't agree with.
Have you been kicked out of someone's house because they disagree with you? Have you been 86'd from a business because you pissed off the shop owner(s) by annoying them? You know, that happens every day in the U.S. and the world since the beginning of the human race. Humans used to break a rock across someone's skull because they have been annoyed by that human.
No one wants to hand around some annoying asshole who just wants to shove their bleeping opinion he/she does not agree with and sit there listening to it in their own home. They are better off kicking the person out are 86'ing the person from the shop than deciding to break a granite slab across your skull? Humans are humans and are not going to be different. All we can do is develop alternative means to removing an irritant, a festering thorn that's lodged right up the ass. On a web forum, we are bound to find people with differing opinions.
It's a balancing act between tolerance and putting a metaphorical boot in someone's ass like Tom here:
There are many episodes with this kind of predicament for Tom at 50 seconds to a little over a minute in the clip.
This forum has been incredibly tolerant of us so far. Think about it. They are trying to balance between wanting to put their foot in our asses and ignoring us. You comparing the forum to fascism and the SS of Nazi Germany is way off mark. The government of the U.S. and the private businesses and this forum are not even close to that. When's the last time this happened here:
The image may be disturbing but this is real and a precursor of the Holocaust
Musk’s “Twitter Files” project, for which he has been releasing Twitter’s old internal documents concerning controversial content-moderation decisions to independent journalists, is an attention spectacle dressed up in the style of investigative journalism designed to delight Musk’s Twitter friends. As I wrote on Friday, some of the internal conversations and screenshots from Musk’s company are fascinating documents that shed light on the intractable problem of content moderation at scale. But they are presented in a blatantly partisan and misleading manner, and have been released only to journalists who share Musk’s pet ideological issues: that the mainstream media is ethically bankrupt, that social media and most elite institutions are biased and colluding with the government.
The hypocrisy at the center of Musk’s Twitter tenure is crucial to the understanding of Musk’s political activism. He has championed ideals of free-speech maximalism and amnesty to those who’ve offended his rules. ... At the same time, Twitter has suspended accounts that have mocked Musk or expressed left-leaning views. Whether intentionally or not, Musk has, in effect, been governing Twitter using the classic Frank Wilhoit maxim: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
You're a narcissistic idiot who thinks that you will make people believe in your
BS.
Even if you were correct, a person of normal intelligence, maturity, and social skills would have realized that you're not changing anyone's views here.
You're just here to troll and hear yourself talk. Get a life and get some help.
Considering that the Tweets being made less popular (not censured) were from deplorable
Americans that are white supremacists telling blatant lies and inciting violence . . . I can see why you'd think they are trustworthy x-jla.
If you truly feel that way it would be trivial to post evidence of events that led you to feel that way. I posted links to articles that helped shape my opinion in hopes that others might do the same. I can't agree or disagree with your conclusions if I don't know what you're basing them on, and the longer you go on pontificating without citing any sources the less I trust that you want to debate in good faith.
x-jla has stated several times that he doesn't take his posts on this site seriously and is only here to troll. He's not going to provide any sources that informed his option unless they are BS in order to further the trolling.
He won't. He'll just say something like 'you don't agree with me so you call me a troll, wake up, do your own research, be like me' Then he'll throw in the use of the words 'libtards' and 'woke culture' in an attempt to get more attention.
The really pathetic thing is that he's not aware that most of us realize that he's a troll.
x-jla, dumbass, it was a private editing/censorship decision. Google, Apple and Amazon removed/suspended services to Parler as a private company decision because Parler's users (namely the seditionist ones) attack on the Capitol created such a liability that it made Parler too "radioactive" (as in possessing too much liability), that Parler's liability would end up becoming Google's, Apple's, and Amazon's liability because they would have been roped into the lawsuits. None of the companies would even need or bother talking to each other. THEY would have made this decision on their own, each, the very moment that 1/6/2021 event took place and the next few days, with also the media revealing how Parler was used. This meant any company with any connection with Parler in any way or form would be divesting/disassociating themselves with Parler... all independent of each other, concurrently. Even if they all arrived at similar kinds of decisions. It's not, they are talking to each other. It's all independent decisions. Granted, some companies may have shareholders on their board of directors that are on the others but even if they weren't (and possibly the case)... the decisions would be independent of each other and would have happened out of abundant concern for potential civil (possible) class-action lawsuits coming their way.
Just because the government makes a threat would not have compelled them. Criminal charges would be weak and fines would be drop in the bucket. It's the concerns of the civil lawsuits that could amount to much more than any penalty. Google had even in the past put the government through lawsuits when the government tried to push them to do something. Google, Apple, and Amazon aren't small companies. They have considerable resources and their own legal counsel that can challenge the government for awhile. Class-action civil liability lawsuits can be costly and end up on them if they did nothing. There action is a defense against civil lawsuits not some government action. If you know anything about law, governments (Federal, state, and local are limited in their ability to pursue civil lawsuits. Individuals with their lawyers would likely form a class-action suit and file accordingly not some DA or AG. Think about it.
When the RNC use Fox news and their megaphone to not broadcast stories, like say covering the January 6th hearings before a midterm election. That's collusion and censorship too right? Asking for a friend. When are we going to see the Fox news files?
Wrong. You cannot equate. Removing rainbow flags and removing misinformation that is directly damaging the lives of citizens. Those are very different things. Come talk to me when one of your relatives passes away after refusing to get vaccinated and relying on ivermectin.
Dec 13, 22 6:02 pm ·
·
JonathanLivingston
First off. FUCK YOU. HOW DARE YOU? Second, your logic makes no sense. You are saying that people died because they thought the vaccine made them safer? DO YOU THINK NOT HELPING, SOWING DOUBT, and FALSE UNPROVEN STATEMENTS are better? What am I saying clearly you do because that's what you continue to do! I done with this. ARCHITECT WOULD BE GOOD TO RID ITSELF OF THIS TROLL
I have my opinions and they will differ from time to time with others here. Guess what, there can be differences of opinion on things. Sometimes, it's silly differences of opinion where the facts are irrefutable. I had a debate on an issue but its okay. The other person doesn't have to agree but I think they should agree with what the facts say like laws and such. We can disagree on opinions related to but the text of law should be what it says and is itself irrefutable fact. There is room to disagree yet agree on what the facts are. Facts should be the actual evidence and not the opinion of either side. Some things are not as simple so we have to get interviews directly from the various sources. Elon Musk didn't even own Twitter in Jan. 6, 2021. So I would not trust his opining. He should not be opining until the facts are accurately presented as they are in their entirety. Investigative Journalists should not have a strong particular opinion on a subject matter they investigate. They should be neutral and able to let the facts and evidence shape their opinion. Investigative reporting requires investigative research which requires primary sources, first and foremost and minimal reliance on second sources which are at most to support the information from primary sources. What is a primary source in academic and investigative research, x-jla? The meaning is the same. Here's a source: https://umb.libguides.com/PrimarySources/secondary
Now, I'm going to prefer to do an interview of the sources independent of a questionable source's interview because of concern for validity or falsification. The sources I use and evaluate would need to evaluated in the weight and quality of their credibility. An investigative reporter and reports will always by definition be a secondary source. Primary sources must come from the source or a unaltered recording because they are closer to the fact and not layered on with opinions and commentaries. Validity of the sources may have to be authenticated by processes known as diplomatics. I'm talking about the critical analysis not "diplomats" and diplomacy which is not the same despite they derived from the word diploma.
It may be hard for you to grasp this considering your difficulty with nuances. I'm not against moderation in principle. I may be against or have my disagreement with moderation policy from time to time. While I may have a layback policy on most issues but there are points where things are not condoned. Sedition and treason are not among them. There are certain issues that I won't tolerate users doing. This was how I ran BBSs and forums over the years.
Granted, I wouldn't have banned you or removed your posts as often but I may exercise more nuance moderation policies including temporary suspension of posting but I would give a clear warning because moderation needs to maintain some civility. A forum attended for mature, adult yet professional audience like this forum, I am a little more lax but some things may be inappropriate and a warning about it maybe appropriate given this forum has to balance out and is not a NSFW/Porno forum on one end but not a forum intended for children who never heard of the F word or the flipping the bird gesture. A "child-safe" forum, this is not, exactly. Those forums will have stricter policies for obvious reasons when it comes to content.
I'm opposed to an absolute zero moderation policy because it will be a problem.
As a business owner, I understand I can be held liable so I have legal responsibilities as a citizen and a business in the U.S. have certain responsibilities that are enshrined in case law over the past centuries. If I know a person is going to rob a bank, I have to report it to the police otherwise I can and may be held as an accessory to the crime as a person, and my business may be liable under civil liability laws.
Sorry, that was directed at x-jla and this can be removed to trim up the thread. You can eliminate some of the long-winded one but my post with the video and alien pic could probably stay for art sake, although not my own.
First off, Twitter is a privately owned platform and under U.S. federal law can refuse service to anyone. Additionally, a person's free speech applies to protection from the U.S. government censorship or restriction through the adoption and enforcement of laws that abridge such freedom. This does not apply to businesses, private entities, and private person. Boo hoo, those journalists got '86ed by the "shop owner". Get over it. Having a twitter account doesn't make anyone a stake in Twitter's ownership. It just means you are a customer. The "shop owner" has every right to run his shop and refuse service to anyone with very few exceptions. Right or wrong, morally is irrelevant. Morals isn't a legal requirements for businesses. It is his right to run the business like shit and lose customers. That is Elon Musk's right. Journalists as with any customer doesn't have any RIGHT to have an account on Twitter. He even has the right to shut Twitter down to everyone but those he personally invites.
Second, if you can't stand the idea of a private entity censoring you and want a twitter like platform that can not infringe on your precious freedom of speech, you petition to your elected officials to set up a Twitter like platform, but that may need to be funded by tax dollars.
Thirdly, Twitter is not the only game in town for social media. Twitter and Facebook are not the only games in town. If you use those platforms to communicate with your friends, you surely have other means to have conversation like email, discord or skype, or a phone call, or in f---ing person.
Lastly, if you don't like a platform and how its ran, you can always just don't use that platform and go somewhere else just like if you don't like how a shop is ran by it's owner, you can always just shop elsewhere.
Short version: Grow the f--- up. If you don't like how the new "shop owner" is running the "shop", you can simply shop elsewhere.
I hope the metaphor is understood here in relation to Twitter or any social media platform or any business or privately owned online community platform/site.
Dec 16, 22 4:06 pm ·
·
tduds
"journalists were censored and banned" yeah the nazi ones.
"nazis are a red herring Godwin law b.s. tangent. that was not the outrage over censorship/shadow banning and/or banning previously on twitter and you know it. journalists were censored and banned for telling the truth but it's okay if it helps your team, right?
Hope this helps!"
They aren’t red herrings or Godwin's Law. Nazi’s , white supremacists, white nationalists are literally posting on social media.
Journalists being banned for telling the truth is a bad thing. Banning people calling themselves journalists who post BS, lies, and conspiracy theories is a good thing.
I'm sorry if you're having a hard time figuring this out. Hope this helps.
It showed Hunter is an addict, was paid well, is entitled. and had a very hard time dealing with his brother's death.
It didn't show collusion with another country. It didn't show a fixed election.
If you know of anything else the lappy showed and can provide proof to back up your claims I'm all ears. If you can't provide proof then stop wasting our time and go back to posting ast x-jla.
In my opinion, since Twitter is a privately owned platform and a business, they can refuse service to anyone for anything except violating anti-discrimination laws as they are written and applicable. Elon's is in his right to moderate as he deems. Morals aside, right or wrong, it's his "shop" now. If people don't like how he runs the "shop", they can go elsewhere. People have every right to boycott him and not use his products/services. Twitter was not worth anything remotely like what Elon was forced to buy after he tried to back out of purchasing it after finding out it was massively overinflated in value, and he is doing things the way he is to destroy Twitter. He's being vindictive to Twitter by running it into the ground.
My understanding is that when Twitter and Facebook didn't allow the HB story to be heavily promoted it was because they couldn't verify any of the claims people were making. They literally had no sources to back up the claims other than one computer tech that was a conspiracy theorist and overall nut job. It took reputable journalists 9 - 12 months to chase down all of the claims initially made by the said nut job.
Yes, and this initial stuff was before Elon acquired Twitter which had a different moderation policy then whatever the policy (if any) that Elon has. Elon's moderation policy is, "don't piss me off or you'll have your account suspended or banned".
Not at all. They have attempted to verify some things. HB's laptop was one of them.
Are you going to provide those verifiable things HB's lappy showed? Or are you just going to post more BS under your new username while your temporary ban in in effect?
1. There isn't any corroborating evidence that the quote you posted here has been found on HB's lappy. It's a comment from one of HB's former business partners who's pissed off at HB.
2. I have no doubt that the lappy is HB's. There has been no 'smoking gun' produced from the lappy that HB colluded with another country for his pappa or that the election was fixed.
3. Their could be evidence on the lappy that proves HB did all these bad things. If he did then he and ANYONE involved should be prosecuted and if found guilty send to prison.
Read my revised statement. I hit enter when replying and whoops . .. .
The link doesn't help corroborate that HB's lappy is full of evidence of the 'conspiracy theory's' put forth by the computer nut job or various other people.
All the article says is:
It's HB's lappy, the copy of the info doesn't appear to have been tampered with,
There is a lot of info on the lappy.
The Republicans are going to be picking the info apart to try to find something bad HB did in hopes of destroying the POTUS.
What the article doesn't say:
Anything about their being proof to the various claims being made by various people regarding HB being bad.
It has nothing backing up the statement made by James Gilliar that you quoted.
I hope this helped.
Would you like to provide another source that supports your quoted claim?
So do you have any credible sources that back up your previous statements or your quote by James Gilliar?
Also the article stated that the information that appears to be a copy of HB's lappy wasn't tampered with. There is nothing in article you linked that says anything about proof that HB's lappy was or wasn't tampered with.
You really need to actually read the articles you post.
I stopped pretty much as soon as possible from the moment I noticed his posts were removed. No need to belabor it. The rest of us are more on the same page than not.
Twitter files
I believe the term that I came up with last year to describe the collusion between the state and media companies was “outsourced tyranny”. It was called a “conspiracy theory” by almost all of the users in here. It’s been confirmed that the fbi was closely working with Twitter to silence speech. If you are ok with this, you are a fascist. It’s that simple. In the wake of this Twitter fiasco, I hope archinect sees their role as a social media platform in a new light and reconsiders their culture of censorship. While I understand that archinect is not working with any government authority, they are certainly mirroring larger platforms that are, like Twitter and FB. Change, or go down on the wrong side of history…
... and what evidence do you have to support such claims?
lol
Do you have any evidence to support what you're saying x-jla?
I have. Still provide proof that supports ALL the claims you made in your OP.
Ok, x-jla,
You presented something by a source that is potentially questionable. Unless you have all the facts and not just excerpts, it's best to shut the f--- up. The DOJ and FBI isn't policing free speech. If they were, YOU would be in jail because they would have already detected your message here, hacked the server, got the information and back route to you ISP within 15 to 30 minutes of your post, then got your account information from the ISP to your home or office or place of employment within 15-30 after that. If you live anywhere near a major city (within a 30 minute drive to a major city, they will be at your home, office,or place of employment within 1 hour.
It would take FBI a little longer to mobilize an FBI crew to get to me but they would be able to get local resources like local police department or state police for a faster response including provisional use of the local federal border control officer to aid in such then hand over me to FBI if they were to. They can likewise do similarly if it makes any sense for them to apprehend you more quickly. If you live in a big city, they can drop in shock & awe and grab your butt...if they were actually doing such a fascist scheme. That is what an actual Nazi fascist-type regime would be doing in this 21st-century technology age.
If they were actually doing such "fascism" as what the term means with actual historic precedence in mind, you would already be arrested by now since your first post. That would be what the SS would have done. Get your facts straight. Make sure you have all the facts or just exercise your right to STFU and if someone bans you or nukes your posts here, it isn't the FBI or DOJ.
It's would be the site's moderators or the site's owner, who probably don't like you and don't want your spouting b.s. on here... as far as they are going to interpret your statements. Since it is privately owned, it's like you being an unwanted guest getting kicked out of the owner's home. You're in Paul Petrunia's "house" and "office" on the internet. If he or his house "guards" aka "bouncers" don't like you or what you say... thrown out you will be. Get the picture? Get the idea?
The FBI and DOJ don't give a shit about individual free speech. They do give a shit about someone or some foreign interest, interfering with elections in the U.S. and individual(s), foreign and/or domestic, riling up people into committing mass-scale rioting, insurrections/sedition, and such acts of war against the U.S., its member states, and territories. Get your shit straight and clear with all the facts. You don't have an absolute unfettered right to speak or write whatever the f--- you want without the possibility of consequences or prosecution. The founders never intended that at all.
People are free to have their opinion but they aren't free to use speech in a manner with intent to rile people up... inciting and inflaming their anger and emotions, to the extent where a reasonable person can reasonably assume that people in such a crowd or group would go off doing something criminal. You can be sued for liability. You might not get criminal charges but it doesn't mean you can't be liable because no reasonable person can reasonably assume everyone are calm, collective, law-abiding, peaceful people. A reasonable person knows and understands the real world and there are a lot of unhinged and disturbed individuals. Every large mass crowd has some percentage of thos kinds of individuals.
A reasonable person in this age of internet and telecommunication and streaming, knows people don't have to physically be in front of you to listen to your speech when you know you are being recorded and streamed. Donald Trump knew this on Jan. 6th. He's been in "show business" and knows about internet streaming and all even if he doesn't know exactly how the technology works. He knows how to use phone apps like twitter, youtube, and watch something live on his phone. Let's not assume he's totally oblivious. He knew what he was doing.
The confrontation around the first amendment in digital forums is coming. But I don't think the issue is truly what X-jla and many think it is and they are going to be disappointed in how this ends. Elon sees taking this stand as a free speech absolutist as a safe marketing play for his new acquisition. It's no different than the shiny bumper on any other regurgitated tech he has "ushered" forward.
You take a forum, Twitter, Facebook, or Archinect and compare it to a public plaza. It's not. It is a private building built on the back of the public infrastructure. The public plaza is the internet at large if you will. When they throw you out of the building you are still welcome to go shout on the street. Make your own website. Self publish. No one is stopping them. See Truth Social.
Converse to Twitter, Archinect would never have any incentive to allow un-moderated posting. Some heavier moderation would actually and does increase the value of the site by keeping the focus, civil professional and architectural. Which I appreciate.
The moniker Outsourced Tyranny goes more with citizens united in my opinion. The collusion is in the opposite direction. Government (particularly one party) subverting the will of the people by interpreting corporate spending as speech undermines democracy.
More like the government pressuring an airline to not allow a known terrorist to fly. It's for the good of us all. See you have a right to your free speech. But not free speech amplification. You're welcome to go build your own amplifier if you want. Again see truth social. Anyone can shout anything they want to anyone they want and they are not put in jail for it. Stop overreacting. If ideas have actual merit they don't prove themselves out via Twitter.
It's scary that you don't want terrorists on airplanes Jonathan
So you agree there is a need for the government agency to reach out to industry for a matter of life safety? The deep state violating privacy now is your issue? Twitter files that had nothing to do with the invasion of privacy. It's your own boogieman .
Ben Franklin would have no idea what an airplane is.
What if grandma is a sponsor of terrorists like being a KKK member? If grandma is connected to terrorist groups, should they not investigate where the evidence is.... even if it is a grandma. It is not always clear. They aren't going to be sifting through grannie's underwear unless there's good probable cause for search warrant. They have to have that to get the search warrant. If there isn't a good reason, of course not. If there is, then yes as with all people REGARDLESS of age or gender.
You can not possibly in this day and age have the security without your internet activity being subject to search. Internet is not private and never is. If you don't want your so-called private conversation being being publically known on the internet, keep it off the internet or keep your thoughts to yourself. You have the right to shut the f--- up. Don't speak or write on the internet unless you are willing to accept that others will hear or read it. It's like talking out loud in a grocery store. While it is open to the public as in public accommodation, it is still a privately owned venue. The internet is like the private buildings and public streets and public parks. It's like a digital city. Like real cities, its a combination of public and private spaces.
The 1st Amendment rights to a limited degree may affect a business (subject to the anti-discrimination laws as they are written) but this doesn't mean the Constitutional rights applies as they would against the government. On a private non-business related site, the Constitution has no place or jurisdiction in the matter just as it would a privately run BBS or some guest being kicked out of someone's home because the person offended the home owner. In Oregon, businesses have this "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". Except for explicitly violation of anti-discrimination laws, anyone can be refused service. Political opinions are not necessarily something protected under anti-discrimination laws.
I am not speaking to all the laws of other states. Then there is the federal law and international (multi-national jurisdiction issues).
Since the internet and social media and platforms based in the U.S. would be subject to U.S. Federal law.... Federal law does grant businesses the right to refuse service to anyone with the caveat that they do not refuse service based on:
https://huckleberry.com/blog/r...
Political viewpoints, traditionally, has not been viewed as under "religion or creed" as the terms legislative intent were.
In cases, a particular state law may have jurisdiction. California for example, may apply but in that case, you can't be discriminately merely for being part of member of a political party or partaking in political activities but this mainly applies more strictly to employment discrimination on these grounds.
A person can be banned, not necessarily what their political view is but if they were deemed rude and it's bothering other guests. In essence, on a web forum or a social media platform, users are in every essence, a customer/guest on the platform.
Given this forum is run by an organization/entity of some sort, it may be held to standards applicable to businesses than merely a website/blog of merely a person, it would be best practices for their being clearly established rules of conduct that may constitute disciplinary action and to an extent, and a fairly consistent enforcement/disciplinary policy.
This site appears to have a reference to TOS and that posts maybe deleted and accounts banned such as: "Please be productive, helpful, considerate and smart with your comments. Comments that do not follow the guidelines in our T.O.S. may be deleted. Abuse may lead to account banning." T.O.S. found here: https://archinect.com/forum/thread/1560/
Over the years, the forum has been loose at times on this front by has been improving in ways on this front. A policy guide should be provide to those appointed as moderators providing guidance on how disciplinary actions are made and clarity of reason that a ban - which is within the "right to refuse service" does not violate the laws. All these are things I think is being done or been done and legal review cycles to assure that they have not or are not violating laws with reasonable attempt on legal analysis periodically.
On face value alone, I think the Terms of Service which is also the source for the rules of conduct does not appear to be discriminatory on basis of protected classes based on my unqualified analysis. However, I am not an attorney for the performance of legal analysis which would need to go deeper than just the text but the practices. Having this T.O.S. policy is a good thing for organizations such as Archinect.
You can deny but denial doesn't help you. If they were policing like the fascists you claim them to be, you would already be in a jail cell never to see a court room. You would be tormented, beaten, teased because guess the f--- what, fascist governments are police states controlled by a dictator under perpetual martial law. They don't even have trials. They skip all that and the lawyers. They arrest you then punish you however they want. Even execute you through the horror of atrocities you could not even fathom. You never lived or experienced this.
Frankly, I can refuse service to anyone regarding my own business. I have ran BBSs before. I have banned people before. What punishment do I get for doing that, under law. ZERO. Why?
The first amendments says it: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." I'm not Congress.
It doesn't say, "individuals and businesses shall make no rules respecting an established religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the individual and/or business for a redress of grievances."
The Constitution's FIRST AMENDMENT protects you from Congress of the United States, not censorship by private persons or businesses.
More accurately: The Constitution's FIRST AMENDMENT protects you from Congress of the United States, the United States government, U.S. territorial government & by extension of 14th amendment & state constitution.... state government, and local governments within the states or territories, not censorship by private persons or businesses.
If you did that sedition and were using my forum to conspire such, I would remove your posts from public view, shut down your posting privileges, send all information I can to law enforcement so they can take actions including arresting you and your co-conspirators, and permanently ban your account and your conspirators. Private web forums and social media are not democracies. They NEVER were. Only idiot morons think that. No one is going to host you or provide services to you if you support and sponsor sedition and treason. No business is going to be an accessory party to you or your criminal users, making them liable to your crimes. There's no collusion. It's common fucking sense. Who the hell wants to be sued by the families of those harmed in a seditious riot and be sued in a class-action that may amount to millions of dollars per person that can rise into billions of dollars worth of civil liability. Hell, there's no particular collusion. FBI may have wanted information relating to the seditionists but when the media publishes that Parler was where seditionists were organizing and to an extent planning their act of sedition of attacking the U.S. Capitol. This immediately caused Google, Apple and Amazon taking their own action to disassociate with Parler and its users. The seditionists made Parler "radioactive". Anyone that associates with them and those seditionist users are going to be ripe targets for civil lawsuits. It doesn't take the FBI at all. They were going to do this even if the FBI never contacted them. This would have been something the companies own legal counsel would have suggested the companies directors and executives to take such action. FBI's own role regarding Parler was minimal if any between 1/6/2021 and 1/10/2021. Companies have been held liable under civil court lawsuits for same and other criminal planning happening on their platform or premises for practically a century, already. It's like any one who gives aid, comfort, or otherwise to a person who assassinates a President. Does the name Samuel Mudd ring a bell? Does the phrase, "your name is mud" ring a bell in your head?
x-jla is on the wrong side of history
The Constitution's FIRST AMENDMENT protects you from Congress of the United States, the United States government, U.S. territorial government and by extension of 14th amendment & state constitution, the state government, and local governments within the states or territories. It does not protect you from censorship by private persons or businesses.
What? You think the FBI and DOJ should simply do nothing as complete and total fucking dereliction of duty and just let seditionists to conspire and on attacking the U.S. Capitol and other targets throught the U.S.???? You don't want a government at all. How about live on a boat in the waters of the ocean outside the jurisdiction of any country and see how well your lif and the life of your family would be when you and your family can be made hostage, slaves, raped and murder.... all without any laws or government to come for your rescue. They didn't collude in the manner you are alluding to.
No one outsources tyranny without a good reason. Additionally, the entire so called "twitter files" released by Elon Musk, himself, can be entirely fabricated bullshit because that can be entirely made up by a single fiction writer in just a week's time and there has been more than enough time since then. Come on? Lets get the people to testify under polygraph and penalty of perjury if they lie.
I would expect law enforcement to make pressing demands to take effort to disrupt the planning of acts of domestic terrorism which is what sedition like the attack on the Capitol is a type of. Every single one of them denounced their citizenship by the act of sedition and not a single one of them should even be afforded rights as a citizen and should be sent to Guantanamo Bay for 24/7 joy of real interrogation not the powder puff candy-coated version of interrogation that you get in normal police stations. Our justice system has been too soft regarding punishment for crimes, for way too long. I don't know where you were on January 6, 2021.
As for my opinion, seditionists should be punished, de-platformed, and prevented from being able to conspire. Solitary confinement for every single one of them. Platforms that aid and abets sedition in order to make a racist, misogynist, assh-le as dictator of the United States, by providing aid and comfort to seditionists to conspire acts of sedition and treason against the United States and its own fellow citizens of the country that they voluntarily gave up their citizenship to do this. You can't be a citizen and be a seditionist/treasonist terrorist.
The only one that "outsourced" tyranny is Donald Trump and his administration and there was a group of un-American asswipes that would do what Trump wants. Keep in mind that Donald Trump is a villain that wanted to be President-dictator for the rest of his life at this point. Already impeached and a name brand that became associated with corrupt and evil so he went all out villain... but not supervillain (he lacks style and presentation). He knew there were militant followers who would do whatever he wants.
He couldn't reliably get an actual active military to do what he wanted to do. He didn't trust the FBI, the DOJ, and judicial branch. The legislative branch would be a problem. Stopping the certification of the electoral votes would not be possible by peaceful lawful protests because they would had to do the protest from over 100 yards away from the Capitol building which means the only way to actually stop the electrol vote certification meant outright attacking the Capitol building and cause the Congress to dispurse.
If they had a choice, they would kill and in some cases rape and kill certain younger members of democrats in Congress because there were those among them that were that despicable. They were against anyone that was anti-Trump. They would force the situation where the President would initiate martial law and suspending the U.S. Constitution and ultimately supplanting it after he had the entire Congress and the Supreme Court killed and then systematically killy off the federal judges... putting the entire control of the U.S. in his hands. This is what the seditionists were trying to do. This was to a degree what Donald Trump wanted as end goal... even if he wasn't entirely on page with the means and methods.
I do believe that FBI was greatly concerned about this radical faction mobilizing another attack. The FBI and DOJ didn't entirely bended to whatever Trump wanted. They were having internal problems between those who actually believed in the oath they take and those Trump appointed that were corrupt. After the November 2020 election, Donald Trump gone mentally disturbed because he lost. He never ever lost in anything because he either legitimately won in cases or he cheated and got away with it. Someone like that is not psychologically and morally fit for serving the United States in any capacity but as a convicted criminal doing community service cleaning up dog shit on the sidewalk.
There's more to that we learned about since January 6, 2021 like the government documents he stole and ran off with as he left. No shit he left early which seemed very odd but given his penchant for doing odd things, it was not noticed but that was exactly what he did. He outright should go to prison. He should never be allowed to serve in any political office anywhere in the U.S.
He should be held personally liable under civil lawsuits for the sedition. I'm not so concerned of him going to prison for January 6, 2021 sedition. The Mar-a-lago case and among other criminal cases involving him and his business should be enough to put him away and then it should be his money and wealth taken away for the harm he done. He should be civilally liable for his treatment of the children in those apprehended be ICE.
Punish the asshole where it hurts... his money, properties, and wealth. Send that misapplied copper-toned (orange) faced, Tribble-haired, corrupt Ferengi asshole to the poor house.
.
Here's the thing, Turd McGirt, I can believe that Elon is a cuck, and the FBI are assholes, and you still don't know a fucking thing that you haven't been told. You learn nothing, and extrapolate in a fashion that makes Charlie Kelly blush.
A private corporation reliant on popular engagement taking steps to mitigate the visibility of shit-stain provocateurs that drive down engagement is not a scandal unless you're one of the aforementioned shit-stains.
I don't know how to counter this habit the right has of making up some bullshit, screaming about it until someone tells them to fuck off, and then using that response as evidence of a coverup, other than continuing to point out that it's their main strategy.
which politically inconvenient truths were silenced?
If it was an easy question to answer you'd have no issue answering it.
I've read the threads and they're not, in my conclusions, convincing at all. Especially if you've actually spent time on twitter.
x-jla, it's not left vs. right. It's that the left is right and the so-called 'right' and especially you, are WRONG. The Republicans are not right. They got rid of those that are right and sensible and went for all the crazies, corrupt, loons and wack job wrong people with nothing but wrong. This is because the Republican party is morally dead because they pushed out those people. They are bought up by the KKK, neo-nazi (aryan nation), neo-Confederates, and white supremacists. That is what the political party is, now. All remaining real Republicans that don't support racism and all that crap should leave that party, TODAY... NOW... if they haven't. They should start a new party and let the GOP go down with these wacky nutjobs and get decertified by the FEC and state elections commissions and be recognized as the terrorist supercell that they have turned the political party into.
That's because they are so backwards that their heads are in their ass.
".. town squares are public spaces, governed in some way by the public. That is what makes them a town square rather than a square in a town. They are not the playthings of whimsical billionaires. They do not exist, as Twitter did for so long, to provide returns to shareholders. ... A town square controlled by one man isn’t a town square. It’s a storefront, an art project or possibly a game preserve."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/1...
Still waiting on someone to post a single example in this thread of such a thing.
You say a lot of thing x-jla. You don't provide any proof to support what you say though.
Not everything, but one or two would be nice.
Stop insisting things are widely known as a method of avoiding giving refutable information. The tactic is old and dumb.
The thing is I can almost always guess where your information is coming from because you parrot the catch phrases and talking points to a T in between fevered insistence that you're thinking for yourself. I just like to see you offer up what you think is unbiased truth so everyone else can see that it's mostly 3rd tier right wing opinion pieces and youtube podcasts.
The main difference between you and I is I know what water I'm swimming in.
x-jla, you have the perfect batting average of making fouls. Do a real investigation. Get the facts directly from all parties involved. Be a real investigative journalist, then publish. Don't waste our time and your time here. You are going to get your posts removed and no, it won't be because of the GOVERNMENT. It will because you pissed off the moderators if not the site owner like absolutely every single time you had been censored on this forum.
.
"In fairness, the Twitter Files do show that the company makes amplification decisions about certain accounts. And while that’s not especially revelatory to people who’ve paid attention, the files do speak to the immense power wielded by tech platforms. It’s a power that makes Republicans and Democrats queasy, albeit often in different ways. As content-moderation experts will tell you, it’s a messy system where people can make the wrong call with occasionally disastrous results. In this way, the Twitter Files do what technology critics have long done: point out a mostly intractable problem that is at the heart of our societal decision to outsource broad swaths of our political discourse and news consumption to corporate platforms whose infrastructure and design were made for viral advertising."
https://www.theatlantic.com/te...
Sure but don't you think that it would be the family of the police officers harmed or killed during that insurrection and others harmed that would be suing that is going to be the greater legal risk. What criminal conviction would result in a company actually going to prison? They would only be fined. Companies are legal constructs that are basically forms, and bank accounts. Only people actually can be put in prison. Sure, the government may or may not have exerted any particular "threat" of criminal charges. They may have only requested information and at most threaten obstruction charges if the companies tried to deliberately obstruct. The thing that caused Apple, Google, and Amazon to drop/suspend Parler from their services more likely had nothing to do with the FBI investigation requesting information. I'd bet they'd be more concern with hundreds of people in the U.S. Capitol building that were harmed emotionally/psychologically, injured, or killed and their families suing these companies for billions of dollars. Parler would file bankruptcy whih would have turned those people to suing Apple, Google, and Amazon because they won't so easily file bankruptcy. They would be the purse that has money and that is where the lawyers for these people will go after.
"That’s all correct, but you are leaving out the worst part, that government itself has the power to capture this power. This goes beyond immense corporate power, which in and of itself has some disastrous potential. This is the merger of state and corporate interests. Call it fascism or whatever you want." You leave out the inconvenient truth, any one or any group of people has the power to capture power and ultimately have the power to oppress the world. The problem is, you are making out your personal grievances as if Archinect is part of the great grand COLLUSION to oppress you and those we don't agree with.
Have you been kicked out of someone's house because they disagree with you? Have you been 86'd from a business because you pissed off the shop owner(s) by annoying them? You know, that happens every day in the U.S. and the world since the beginning of the human race. Humans used to break a rock across someone's skull because they have been annoyed by that human.
No one wants to hand around some annoying asshole who just wants to shove their bleeping opinion he/she does not agree with and sit there listening to it in their own home. They are better off kicking the person out are 86'ing the person from the shop than deciding to break a granite slab across your skull? Humans are humans and are not going to be different. All we can do is develop alternative means to removing an irritant, a festering thorn that's lodged right up the ass. On a web forum, we are bound to find people with differing opinions.
It's a balancing act between tolerance and putting a metaphorical boot in someone's ass like Tom here:
There are many episodes with this kind of predicament for Tom at 50 seconds to a little over a minute in the clip.
This forum has been incredibly tolerant of us so far. Think about it. They are trying to balance between wanting to put their foot in our asses and ignoring us. You comparing the forum to fascism and the SS of Nazi Germany is way off mark. The government of the U.S. and the private businesses and this forum are not even close to that. When's the last time this happened here:
The image may be disturbing but this is real and a precursor of the Holocaust
https://www.timesofisrael.com/...
There's horrible stuff the Nazi did in WWII that I don't need to show but it's horrible.
Musk’s “Twitter Files” project, for which he has been releasing Twitter’s old internal documents concerning controversial content-moderation decisions to independent journalists, is an attention spectacle dressed up in the style of investigative journalism designed to delight Musk’s Twitter friends. As I wrote on Friday, some of the internal conversations and screenshots from Musk’s company are fascinating documents that shed light on the intractable problem of content moderation at scale. But they are presented in a blatantly partisan and misleading manner, and have been released only to journalists who share Musk’s pet ideological issues: that the mainstream media is ethically bankrupt, that social media and most elite institutions are biased and colluding with the government.
The hypocrisy at the center of Musk’s Twitter tenure is crucial to the understanding of Musk’s political activism. He has championed ideals of free-speech maximalism and amnesty to those who’ve offended his rules. ... At the same time, Twitter has suspended accounts that have mocked Musk or expressed left-leaning views. Whether intentionally or not, Musk has, in effect, been governing Twitter using the classic Frank Wilhoit maxim: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/te...
what
and in what ways do you think that's not happening?
what
x-jla -
You're a narcissistic idiot who thinks that you will make people believe in your BS.
Even if you were correct, a person of normal intelligence, maturity, and social skills would have realized that you're not changing anyone's views here.
You're just here to troll and hear yourself talk. Get a life and get some help.
Considering that the Tweets being made less popular (not censured) were from deplorable Americans that are white supremacists telling blatant lies and inciting violence . . . I can see why you'd think they are trustworthy x-jla.
If you truly feel that way it would be trivial to post evidence of events that led you to feel that way. I posted links to articles that helped shape my opinion in hopes that others might do the same. I can't agree or disagree with your conclusions if I don't know what you're basing them on, and the longer you go on pontificating without citing any sources the less I trust that you want to debate in good faith.
x-jla has stated several times that he doesn't take his posts on this site seriously and is only here to troll. He's not going to provide any sources that informed his option unless they are BS in order to further the trolling.
I just want him to say it.
He won't. He'll just say something like 'you don't agree with me so you call me a troll, wake up, do your own research, be like me' Then he'll throw in the use of the words 'libtards' and 'woke culture' in an attempt to get more attention.
The really pathetic thing is that he's not aware that most of us realize that he's a troll.
Try harder.
Try harder.
.
Your smoking gun is hunters fuckin laptop? lol ok.
https://www.techdirt.com/2022/12/07/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-twitter-and-hunter-bidens-laptop/
x-jla - I never said anything about the FBI.
You're the one that called this government censorship.
Bye.
You can't even argue with 1 person at once.
x-jla, dumbass, it was a private editing/censorship decision. Google, Apple and Amazon removed/suspended services to Parler as a private company decision because Parler's users (namely the seditionist ones) attack on the Capitol created such a liability that it made Parler too "radioactive" (as in possessing too much liability), that Parler's liability would end up becoming Google's, Apple's, and Amazon's liability because they would have been roped into the lawsuits. None of the companies would even need or bother talking to each other. THEY would have made this decision on their own, each, the very moment that 1/6/2021 event took place and the next few days, with also the media revealing how Parler was used. This meant any company with any connection with Parler in any way or form would be divesting/disassociating themselves with Parler... all independent of each other, concurrently. Even if they all arrived at similar kinds of decisions. It's not, they are talking to each other. It's all independent decisions. Granted, some companies may have shareholders on their board of directors that are on the others but even if they weren't (and possibly the case)... the decisions would be independent of each other and would have happened out of abundant concern for potential civil (possible) class-action lawsuits coming their way.
Just because the government makes a threat would not have compelled them. Criminal charges would be weak and fines would be drop in the bucket. It's the concerns of the civil lawsuits that could amount to much more than any penalty. Google had even in the past put the government through lawsuits when the government tried to push them to do something. Google, Apple, and Amazon aren't small companies. They have considerable resources and their own legal counsel that can challenge the government for awhile. Class-action civil liability lawsuits can be costly and end up on them if they did nothing. There action is a defense against civil lawsuits not some government action. If you know anything about law, governments (Federal, state, and local are limited in their ability to pursue civil lawsuits. Individuals with their lawyers would likely form a class-action suit and file accordingly not some DA or AG. Think about it.
I think I gave it enough good faith to make the point clear. rope to hang oneself and all that... ciao.
Dummy went n got himself nuked again. When will he learn?
When the RNC use Fox news and their megaphone to not broadcast stories, like say covering the January 6th hearings before a midterm election. That's collusion and censorship too right? Asking for a friend. When are we going to see the Fox news files?
Well they will for a fee
and we want to think that twitter is better?
"collusion"
Wrong. You cannot equate. Removing rainbow flags and removing misinformation that is directly damaging the lives of citizens. Those are very different things. Come talk to me when one of your relatives passes away after refusing to get vaccinated and relying on ivermectin.
First off. FUCK YOU. HOW DARE YOU? Second, your logic makes no sense. You are saying that people died because they thought the vaccine made them safer? DO YOU THINK NOT HELPING, SOWING DOUBT, and FALSE UNPROVEN STATEMENTS are better? What am I saying clearly you do because that's what you continue to do! I done with this. ARCHITECT WOULD BE GOOD TO RID ITSELF OF THIS TROLL
106 posts in 24hrs. A new record?
109
...
As a reminder of Chad's post that summarizes everything:
and now x-jla:
Enjoy the visual and audio art !!
You are the worst kind of human
I have my opinions and they will differ from time to time with others here. Guess what, there can be differences of opinion on things. Sometimes, it's silly differences of opinion where the facts are irrefutable. I had a debate on an issue but its okay. The other person doesn't have to agree but I think they should agree with what the facts say like laws and such. We can disagree on opinions related to but the text of law should be what it says and is itself irrefutable fact. There is room to disagree yet agree on what the facts are. Facts should be the actual evidence and not the opinion of either side. Some things are not as simple so we have to get interviews directly from the various sources. Elon Musk didn't even own Twitter in Jan. 6, 2021. So I would not trust his opining. He should not be opining until the facts are accurately presented as they are in their entirety. Investigative Journalists should not have a strong particular opinion on a subject matter they investigate. They should be neutral and able to let the facts and evidence shape their opinion. Investigative reporting requires investigative research which requires primary sources, first and foremost and minimal reliance on second sources which are at most to support the information from primary sources. What is a primary source in academic and investigative research, x-jla? The meaning is the same. Here's a source: https://umb.libguides.com/PrimarySources/secondary
Now, I'm going to prefer to do an interview of the sources independent of a questionable source's interview because of concern for validity or falsification. The sources I use and evaluate would need to evaluated in the weight and quality of their credibility. An investigative reporter and reports will always by definition be a secondary source. Primary sources must come from the source or a unaltered recording because they are closer to the fact and not layered on with opinions and commentaries. Validity of the sources may have to be authenticated by processes known as diplomatics. I'm talking about the critical analysis not "diplomats" and diplomacy which is not the same despite they derived from the word diploma.
Under no circumstances have I been suggesting shoveling folks into an oven.
It may be hard for you to grasp this considering your difficulty with nuances. I'm not against moderation in principle. I may be against or have my disagreement with moderation policy from time to time. While I may have a layback policy on most issues but there are points where things are not condoned. Sedition and treason are not among them. There are certain issues that I won't tolerate users doing. This was how I ran BBSs and forums over the years.
Granted, I wouldn't have banned you or removed your posts as often but I may exercise more nuance moderation policies including temporary suspension of posting but I would give a clear warning because moderation needs to maintain some civility. A forum attended for mature, adult yet professional audience like this forum, I am a little more lax but some things may be inappropriate and a warning about it maybe appropriate given this forum has to balance out and is not a NSFW/Porno forum on one end but not a forum intended for children who never heard of the F word or the flipping the bird gesture. A "child-safe" forum, this is not, exactly. Those forums will have stricter policies for obvious reasons when it comes to content.
I'm opposed to an absolute zero moderation policy because it will be a problem.
As a business owner, I understand I can be held liable so I have legal responsibilities as a citizen and a business in the U.S. have certain responsibilities that are enshrined in case law over the past centuries. If I know a person is going to rob a bank, I have to report it to the police otherwise I can and may be held as an accessory to the crime as a person, and my business may be liable under civil liability laws.
Sorry, that was directed at x-jla and this can be removed to trim up the thread. You can eliminate some of the long-winded one but my post with the video and alien pic could probably stay for art sake, although not my own.
I repeat ...
lol
This is the funniest thread in a while of hi-end lo-end trolling among architects.
Free Twitter
"I'm Rick Bitch!"
"Dave, what should I say?"
The biggest snowflake, censored journos.
Always was bad. Not providing nazis and COVID deniers a platform to spew hate speech and lies isn't censorship though.
.
Care to try writing that last post in a coherent manor Fap?
First off, Twitter is a privately owned platform and under U.S. federal law can refuse service to anyone. Additionally, a person's free speech applies to protection from the U.S. government censorship or restriction through the adoption and enforcement of laws that abridge such freedom. This does not apply to businesses, private entities, and private person. Boo hoo, those journalists got '86ed by the "shop owner". Get over it. Having a twitter account doesn't make anyone a stake in Twitter's ownership. It just means you are a customer. The "shop owner" has every right to run his shop and refuse service to anyone with very few exceptions. Right or wrong, morally is irrelevant. Morals isn't a legal requirements for businesses. It is his right to run the business like shit and lose customers. That is Elon Musk's right. Journalists as with any customer doesn't have any RIGHT to have an account on Twitter. He even has the right to shut Twitter down to everyone but those he personally invites.
Second, if you can't stand the idea of a private entity censoring you and want a twitter like platform that can not infringe on your precious freedom of speech, you petition to your elected officials to set up a Twitter like platform, but that may need to be funded by tax dollars.
Thirdly, Twitter is not the only game in town for social media. Twitter and Facebook are not the only games in town. If you use those platforms to communicate with your friends, you surely have other means to have conversation like email, discord or skype, or a phone call, or in f---ing person.
Lastly, if you don't like a platform and how its ran, you can always just don't use that platform and go somewhere else just like if you don't like how a shop is ran by it's owner, you can always just shop elsewhere.
Short version: Grow the f--- up. If you don't like how the new "shop owner" is running the "shop", you can simply shop elsewhere.
I hope the metaphor is understood here in relation to Twitter or any social media platform or any business or privately owned online community platform/site.
"journalists were censored and banned" yeah the nazi ones.
drums please, Fab? wrote:
"nazis are a red herring Godwin law b.s. tangent. that was not the outrage over censorship/shadow banning and/or banning previously on twitter and you know it. journalists were censored and banned for telling the truth but it's okay if it helps your team, right?
Hope this helps!"
They aren’t red herrings or Godwin's Law. Nazi’s , white supremacists, white nationalists are literally posting on social media.
Journalists being banned for telling the truth is a bad thing. Banning people calling themselves journalists who post BS, lies, and conspiracy theories is a good thing.
I'm sorry if you're having a hard time figuring this out. Hope this helps.
It was a lappy, it existed.
It showed Hunter is an addict, was paid well, is entitled. and had a very hard time dealing with his brother's death.
It didn't show collusion with another country. It didn't show a fixed election.
If you know of anything else the lappy showed and can provide proof to back up your claims I'm all ears. If you can't provide proof then stop wasting our time and go back to posting ast x-jla.
In my opinion, since Twitter is a privately owned platform and a business, they can refuse service to anyone for anything except violating anti-discrimination laws as they are written and applicable. Elon's is in his right to moderate as he deems. Morals aside, right or wrong, it's his "shop" now. If people don't like how he runs the "shop", they can go elsewhere. People have every right to boycott him and not use his products/services. Twitter was not worth anything remotely like what Elon was forced to buy after he tried to back out of purchasing it after finding out it was massively overinflated in value, and he is doing things the way he is to destroy Twitter. He's being vindictive to Twitter by running it into the ground.
My understanding is that when Twitter and Facebook didn't allow the HB story to be heavily promoted it was because they couldn't verify any of the claims people were making. They literally had no sources to back up the claims other than one computer tech that was a conspiracy theorist and overall nut job. It took reputable journalists 9 - 12 months to chase down all of the claims initially made by the said nut job.
Yes, and this initial stuff was before Elon acquired Twitter which had a different moderation policy then whatever the policy (if any) that Elon has. Elon's moderation policy is, "don't piss me off or you'll have your account suspended or banned".
Not at all. They have attempted to verify some things. HB's laptop was one of them.
Are you going to provide those verifiable things HB's lappy showed? Or are you just going to post more BS under your new username while your temporary ban in in effect?
Nope. You're the new incarnation of x-jla.
See how annoying it is when someone makes baseless claims that aren't backed up with evidence.
Speaking on evidence, are you going to post any about HB lappy?
Source?
That great.
A couple of things to remember:
1. There isn't any corroborating evidence that the quote you posted here has been found on HB's lappy. It's a comment from one of HB's former business partners who's pissed off at HB.
2. I have no doubt that the lappy is HB's. There has been no 'smoking gun' produced from the lappy that HB colluded with another country for his pappa or that the election was fixed.
3. Their could be evidence on the lappy that proves HB did all these bad things. If he did then he and ANYONE involved should be prosecuted and if found guilty send to prison.
Read my revised statement. I hit enter when replying and whoops . .. .
The link doesn't help corroborate that HB's lappy is full of evidence of the 'conspiracy theory's' put forth by the computer nut job or various other people.
All the article says is:
What the article doesn't say:
I hope this helped.
Would you like to provide another source that supports your quoted claim?
So do you have any credible sources that back up your previous statements or your quote by James Gilliar?
Also the article stated that the information that appears to be a copy of HB's lappy wasn't tampered with. There is nothing in article you linked that says anything about proof that HB's lappy was or wasn't tampered with.
You really need to actually read the articles you post.
Spoken like troll without shred of credibility.
I also find it alarming that you'd throw away one of our basic rights as Russian disinformation just so that you could appear truthful.
So is this thread over now?
just wait for jawknee to pop in...
yes, onto the facebook files
That pedo has the attention span and intellect of a gnat. He won't do anything.
I stopped pretty much as soon as possible from the moment I noticed his posts were removed. No need to belabor it. The rest of us are more on the same page than not.
For some reason I keep reading the title of this thread as, "Twitter Flies." There is a joke buried in there but I can't seem to find it.
There are many jokes in this thread. ;) Mostly x-jla.
Bravo x-jla
Shut it all done is my opinion
*down
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.