Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[beanman12345]

I once left a head of salad in my yard befor going on vacation for 4 weeks during summer. It was forgotten during Barbeque, don't ask. It was mid August. When we came back, the salad had basically disintegrated, but the stains it left had the exact same color and consistency.



Twitter and facebook are privately owned outlets. It is up to them to publish or not publish whatever they want. Freedom of speech means you are free to say whatever you want, but if you are doing it on other peoples 'ground' (or in this case, servers), they can stop you or comment on it to whatever degree they want.

If you want to proclaim the earth is flat, fine by me. If you want to do that from my balcony, I'm going to kick you the f out of my house. Freedom of speech doesn't guarantee you a platform to speak. It just means you cannot be punished for what you say.

OANN is also a privately owned outlet. I'm more confused why 230 is a thing now more then ever.

[PhaelixWW]

31% of eligible voters, but not the entire population.

Granted, there are plenty of whackos who can't or don't vote. But still, the point stands. These groups constitute a vocal minority under a very bright spotlight.

I was more talking about the 75m or so kids under 18 who can't legally vote. But even at the 31%, your point still stands.

[Benggaul]

It just means you cannot be punished [by the government] for what you say [except in certain circumstances].

Brackets are my addition. You can't be locked up for saying shit--most of the time. You still can't yell "bomb" on an airplane or "fire" in a theater without facing some legal consequences, I think. You absolutely can be punished by society, however. Isolated, censored and ostracized for being a complete fucking asshole is just the tip of the iceberg.

[xmirrors]

Arizona Judge Throws Out Republican Party Attempt to Delay Certification of Vote in Maricopa County

With prejudice.

Good.

[Skulltaker]

OANN is also a privately owned outlet. I'm more confused why 230 is a thing now more then ever.

I'm not from the US, so, no idea what '230' is, sorry. I feel like googleing that number won't yield any good results, if you'd care to explain...?

Well, OANN made their choice. There is no such thing as an unbiased source out there when it comes to politics. Which is fine. OANN decided to take a stand on the Trump side of things, because it gets them viewers, which gets them cash. They are opportunists. That's just human nature. They are still scumbags, of course. But it was bound to happen. Figures like Trump attract opportunists. It's the same as fans riding the bandwagon of whatevert team is killing it in the current season.

- - - Updated - - -

Brackets are my addition. You can't be locked up for saying shit--most of the time. You still can't yell "bomb" on an airplane or "fire" in a theater without facing some legal consequences, I think. You absolutely can be punished by society, however. Isolated, censored and ostracized for being a complete fucking asshole is just the tip of the iceberg.

Well, yeah, I simplified. Thanks for clarifying. =)

[Benggaul]

I'm not from the US, so, no idea what '230' is, sorry. I feel like googleing that number won't yield any good results, if you'd care to explain...?

Basically it's a law that protects sites like Twitter, Facebook (and MMO-Champion) from facing legal repercussions for things users might say/post on their platform.

[beanman12345]

I'm not from the US, so, no idea what '230' is, sorry. I feel like googleing that number won't yield any good results, if you'd care to explain...?

Well, OANN made their choice. There is no such thing as an unbiased source out there when it comes to politics. Which is fine. OANN decided to take a stand on the Trump side of things, because it gets them viewers, which gets them cash. They are opportunists. That's just human nature. They are still scumbags, of course. But it was bound to happen. Figures like Trump attract opportunists. It's the same as fans riding the bandwagon of whatevert team is killing it in the current season.

from what I understand from section 230 it's that places like facebook and twitter aren't publishers so have a lot more leeway in regards to shit people say simply because they are not publishers. Where as OAN is a publisher, I believe, unless they aren't, in which case maybe it does make sense. But since they're on TV i think that makes them a publisher, maybe I'm wrong. It's confusing to me.

[Skulltaker]

Basically it's a law that protects sites like Twitter, Facebook (and MMO-Champion) from facing legal repercussions for things users might say/post on their platform.

from what I understand from section 230 it's that places like facebook and twitter aren't publishers so have a lot more leeway in regards to shit people say simply because they are not publishers. Where as OAN is a publisher, I believe, unless they aren't, in which case maybe it does make sense. But since they're on TV i think that makes them a publisher, maybe I'm wrong. It's confusing to me.

Thank you both.

Sounds like a rather important article. But still, not being held responsible and not acting are two different pages. If someone commits a crime on my lawn, I'm not held accountable for it. That doesn't mean that I cannot stand up and hinder him, though. The decision is mine. (It's slightly lacking as a metaphor, I know).

Basically, it boils down to the question 'Do you have to stand up against 'evil', or do you chose to do so.' Just because Twitter cannot be held accountable for letting Trump spew lies doesn't mean they have to let it slide. It's the choice of doing what's right, or what is easy. Lean back and move within the safe confines of the law, or stand up to fascism. I'm glad Twitter decided to do what's right.

[beanman12345]

Thank you both.

Sounds like a rather important article. But still, not being held responsible and not acting are two different pages. If someone commits a crime on my lawn, I'm not held accountable for it. That doesn't mean that I cannot stand up and hinder him, though. The decision is mine. (It's slightly lacking as a metaphor, I know).

Basically, it boils down to the question 'Do you have to stand up against 'evil', or do you chose to do so.' Just because Twitter cannot be held accountable for letting Trump spew lies doesn't mean they have to let it slide. It's the choice of doing what's right, or what is easy. Lean back and move within the safe confines of the law, or stand up to fascism. I'm glad Twitter decided to do what's right.

I do agree. I don't really go to any social platforms, other then this and another general gaming forum I use, but anyone standing against authoritarianism get's a thumbs up from me.

[Edge-]

but then why are twitter and facebook fighting so hard to flag lying from trump and other shit in order to keep their 230 status.

That's not why they're doing that at all. They're doing that because Trump is violating their own site rules, but they don't want to take down posts from the President of the United States of America. It has nothing to do with section 230.

[PhaelixWW]

I looked and looked for an analysis of Giuliani's presser. Couldn't find one. Maybe because Giuliani personally attacked the press?

Well, now we know why CNN, for one, took so long to post about Giuliani's embarrassment of a presser. It's because they were fact-checking it, and because there was just so much false information that they... well, just check out the article's headline and it'll give you the TL;DR.

CNN: Fact checking Giuliani and the Trump legal team's wild, fact-free press conference

In a wild, tangent-filled and often contentious press briefing led by President Donald Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, the Trump campaign's legal team laid out its case for widespread voter fraud in the election. The roughly 90-minute briefing was overflowing with falsehoods and conspiracy theories.

At no point did Trump's legal team offer any proof for their allegations of widespread fraud. Jenna Ellis, a legal adviser for the campaign, said the group was laying out an "introductory statement" with more to come, and called the team an "elite strike force." Also working for the campaign, attorney Sidney Powell made extreme, baseless claims about communist Venezuela and George Soros supposedly interfering in the US election. Giuliani on multiple occasions made allegations citing individuals he said couldn't be revealed for their own safety and wellbeing.

Many of their specific claims have already been refuted by federal election security experts and a wide, bipartisan array of election administrators across the country.

<continues...>

[Breccia]

Arizona Judge Throws Out Republican Party Attempt to Delay Certification of Vote in Maricopa County

With prejudice.

Good.

Almost unnecessary, but so is teabagging your kills in CoD.

I don't know what new evidence they're supposed to find. Yeah, Giuliani said he had some, but until he submits it in a court of law, which he's had the chance to do but didn't, hearsay within hearsay becomes fuck you within fuck you. Georgia is set to confirm their results any second and there's been no "whoops, we found all the Trump votes" yet.

[beanman12345]

That's not why they're doing that at all. They're doing that because Trump is violating their own site rules, but they don't want to take down posts from the President of the United States of America. It has nothing to do with section 230.

Ok. It's the impression I got from Jack Dorsey from the judicial meeting as to why they are doing it, but if it's simply due to what your saying I guess it makes sense.

[Breccia]

They’re down to trying to steal the EC at this point through their insanity. Not sure anyone is going to be lining up to board that ship though.

It would have to be people already on the ship, true.

I am wondering if the attempt to de-leigitimize the election will end up backfiring. Trump's rabid fanbase makes up the vast majority of the Party of Trump. If they decide "well I guess voting doesn't matter" wouldn't they just, you know, stop doing it? Especially since Trump will never run again?

[Edge-]

Ok. It's the impression I got from Jack Dorsey from the judicial meeting as to why they are doing it, but if it's simply due to what your saying I guess it makes sense.

Ah, I haven't listened to that so I couldn't say.

But that was functionally the social media companies response to Trump's tweets violating their rules, that they would ignore their rules when it comes to his tweets. And after years of pressure, they started slapping warning labels on them.

230 just protects the companies from being responsible for anything posted on their platforms, that's it. They're not legally responsible if someone plans a kidnapping there, for example.

OAN however, is a publisher and consequently is not protected by 230. That doesn't mean they can't lie though, it just means that if, for example, they host a libelous op-ed on their site then the writer and OAN are both legally liable for it. If all they're doing is spinning nonsense conspiracy theories like the water turning frogs gay, a la Infowars, then they're gravy.

[Benggaul]

BREAKING: Georgia Federal Court REJECTS Republican effort to block certification of election results. There are no remaining lawsuits currently pending in Georgia.

Trump and his allies are now 1-32 in post-election litigation.

Yes, it's a Tweet, but it's a pretty reliable source.

As a reminder, Georgia certification is tomorrow.

EDIT: Bonus points: I believe this was a Trump-appointed judge.

[Edge-]

Yes, it's a Tweet, but it's a pretty reliable source.

As a reminder, Georgia certification is tomorrow.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-electio...it-in-georgia/

Additional citation that's likely a bit more neutral.

[PhaelixWW]

Ah, I haven't listened to that so I couldn't say.

But that was functionally the social media companies response to Trump's tweets violating their rules, that they would ignore their rules when it comes to his tweets. And after years of pressure, they started slapping warning labels on them.

230 just protects the companies from being responsible for anything posted on their platforms, that's it. They're not legally responsible if someone plans a kidnapping there, for example.

OAN however, is a publisher and consequently is not protected by 230. That doesn't mean they can't lie though, it just means that if, for example, they host a libelous op-ed on their site then the writer and OAN are both legally liable for it. If all they're doing is spinning nonsense conspiracy theories like the water turning frogs gay, a la Infowars, then they're gravy.

Yeah, that's the thing. Lying isn't a criminal act (normally), and libel is a tort. So they can lie about random stuff just fine, but if they lie about someone who can claim said lies caused them damages, then that's another matter.

At least that's how my understanding goes.

[beanman12345]

Ah, I haven't listened to that so I couldn't say.

But that was functionally the social media companies response to Trump's tweets violating their rules, that they would ignore their rules when it comes to his tweets. And after years of pressure, they started slapping warning labels on them.

230 just protects the companies from being responsible for anything posted on their platforms, that's it. They're not legally responsible if someone plans a kidnapping there, for example.

OAN however, is a publisher and consequently is not protected by 230. That doesn't mean they can't lie though, it just means that if, for example, they host a libelous op-ed on their site then the writer and OAN are both legally liable for it. If all they're doing is spinning nonsense conspiracy theories like the water turning frogs gay, a la Infowars, then they're gravy.

ah so 230 just protect twitter or youtube or wherever from actual crimes that might be committed like kidnapping and child porn or whatever being done on their platform? ok than clears up everything than. Thank you very much.

I hope OAN doesn't have a comment section than because that seems just like the place where a kidnapping for a governor and burning down the state building might be done due to their batshit irresponsible use of their platform.

[Benggaul]

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-electio...it-in-georgia/

Additional citation that's likely a bit more neutral.

Thanks! I have about a dozen tabs open for later and I just couldn't find a better source for this.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope OAN doesn't have a comment section than because that seems just like the place where a kidnapping for a governor and burning down the state building might be done due to their batshit irresponsible use of their platform.

I hope they have a comment section precisely for that reason. Let the stupid bastards incriminate themselves. Think the FBI won't be listening in?