Deplatform Parler good or bad?

[Vash The Stampede]

It's their fucking property. They can kick off whomever the fuck they want.

There, was that simple enough for you?

I support the First Amendment rights of business owners and private entities. Do you? If so, then you should have no problem with them kicking them out, and refusing to do business with them.

Europeans got upset when they saw this because they don't like the idea that corporations can control what people say and hear. It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication. Credit card companies recently told PornHub to remove certain content or no money. Even credit card companies can determine what you see. You don't want corporations to control censor what people can or cannot see.

[Egomaniac]

Europeans got upset when they saw this because they don't like the idea that corporations can control what people say and hear. It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication. Credit card companies recently told PornHub to remove certain content or no money. Even credit card companies can determine what you see. You don't want corporations to control censor what people can or cannot see.

Kinda buried the lead on exactly what kind of content the Credit Card companies were concerned about.

You lose some of that moral high ground by mentioning that it was child porn they wanted gone.

[Edge-]

Europeans got upset when they saw this because they don't like the idea that corporations can control what people say and hear. It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication. Credit card companies recently told PornHub to remove certain content or no money. Even credit card companies can determine what you see. You don't want corporations to control censor what people can or cannot see.

Honestly, what happened with Pornhub, and what's happening with Google in Australia right now, are a totally separate issue at their core.

It's the fact that the wild-west of the internet is slowly but surely getting tamed, and the business models that tech companies have built themselves on that have been insanely exploitative are getting noticed.

Though real, the Pornhub example may have been one of the worst ones you could have picked to try to make the "corporate censorship" point.

[Egomaniac]

Reducto ad Nazism is trollbait. I treat it the same way people call leftists commies when it suits them. You saw my four paragraphs, maybe get some argumentative skin in the game to show good faith instead of TLDR WAABOUT NAZIS?

I'm not interested in following tangents (IE Deplatforming Parler and Nazism might be logically progressive in your mind, but I don't think Hitler and Goebbels mentioned Parler and internet social media companies in their writings). I'm doubly not interested in following tangents when they're one-liner questions sans explanation, and fail to read and respond to points I raised. Sorry, not biting. Cheers.

Allright, let's drop the Nazi angle.

Should Churches be forced to perform marriage services for Gay couples?

[tehdang]

Allright, let's drop the Nazi angle.

Should Churches be forced to perform marriage services for Gay couples?

Sadly, Churches are nonprofits, and aren't directly comparable to for-profit businesses like Parler, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon. I would look with interest at any forum threads you start bringing up the interaction with nonprofits pursuant to First Amendment religious freedom rights to broach those topics.

[Cthulhu 2020]

TIL that companies monitoring clients for adherence to contract agreements is basically a digital police state.

I have to wonder if these right wingers bitching about being banned from Twitter or Parler being removed from the app store care about the rights of botters in WoW. I mean, Blizzard is basically a police state, banning botters for botting and speed hackers for speed hacking. Why can't they just cheat in peace? They have a right to play the game however they want it, just like everyone else!

[Egomaniac]

Sadly, Churches are nonprofits, and aren't directly comparable to for-profit businesses like Parler, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon. I would look with interest at any forum threads you start bringing up the interaction with nonprofits pursuant to First Amendment religious freedom rights to broach those topics.

The same First Amendment that says that churches don't have to marry gay couples says companies that don't want to do business with other companies don't have to.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Europeans got upset when they saw this because they don't like the idea that corporations can control what people say and hear. It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication. Credit card companies recently told PornHub to remove certain content or no money. Even credit card companies can determine what you see. You don't want corporations to control censor what people can or cannot see.

Yeah it really sucks that the credit card companies told pornhub they weren't allowed to host child pornography or they wouldn't get any money. Fucking corporate censorship man.




I dunno what's going on in other parts of the world, but it seems the vast majority of the "corporate censorship" taking place in the US is people either blatantly breaking ToS, or just straight up BREAKING THE LAW.

I realize many parts of the internet feel like some kind of digital frontier, untamed and shit, but like, are we really going to start bitching about companies enforcing their own rules and government laws? The only thing left I can see anyone bringing out is some kind of slippery slope argument, where like, if we allow companies to enforce laws then who knows what kinds of terrible laws the government will come up with in the future! And we all know how bad slippery slope arguments are.

Until then, it's "Oh no, corporations are not allowing us to look at child pornography or plan coups, how DARE they!"

[Shalcker]

Yeah it really sucks that the credit card companies told pornhub they weren't allowed to host child pornography or they wouldn't get any money. Fucking corporate censorship man.

It is corporate censorship.

There are laws regarding all that; laws by which PornHub abides (in multiple countries too), or it would be unable to operate at all.

I dunno what's going on in other parts of the world, but it seems the vast majority of the "corporate censorship" taking place in the US is people either blatantly breaking ToS, or just straight up BREAKING THE LAW.

Why don't you go after them from law angle then?

Why do you have to pressure infrastructure companies to act instead, thus "deputizing" them to enforce it?

You also realize that laws are not universal? That there are different countries with different approaches?

Enforcing American sensibilities upon the world isn't going to be cheered.

[Orange Joe]

Europeans got upset when they saw this because they don't like the idea that corporations can control what people say and hear. It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication. Credit card companies recently told PornHub to remove certain content or no money. Even credit card companies can determine what you see. You don't want corporations to control censor what people can or cannot see.

I do? Pretty sure I don't even have a twitter account, nor do I contact anyone on facebook when I need to talk to them. Am I doing it wrong or?

[Machismo]

Europeans got upset when they saw this because they don't like the idea that corporations can control what people say and hear. It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication. Credit card companies recently told PornHub to remove certain content or no money. Even credit card companies can determine what you see. You don't want corporations to control censor what people can or cannot see.

Then, Europeans are opposing the concepts of freedom of association.

I want those companies to be free to choose to not do business with Nazis and pedophiles. Is that too much to ask?

- - - Updated - - -

Sadly, Churches are nonprofits, and aren't directly comparable to for-profit businesses like Parler, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon. I would look with interest at any forum threads you start bringing up the interaction with nonprofits pursuant to First Amendment religious freedom rights to broach those topics.

Google, Amazon, and Facebook also have First Amendment rights.

Also, you still didn't answer the fucking question. You are desperately tapdancing away from answering these questions, and it's all to shill for conspiracy theorists and Nazis.

Should a restaurant owner be able to kick out a customer who is yelling racist shit at the other customers?

There, made it as simple as we can. I'll assume any answer other than "yes/no" will be taken as an admission that you think all these companies should be forced to do business with Nazis, conspiracy theorists, and racists. And yes, that includes simply ignoring the question.

[minteK917]

The American justice system was pretty clear. Corporations are people too.

[Santti]

Europeans got upset when they saw this because they don't like the idea that corporations can control what people say and hear. It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication. Credit card companies recently told PornHub to remove certain content or no money. Even credit card companies can determine what you see. You don't want corporations to control censor what people can or cannot see.

Who are these Europeans you speak of? I'm from Europe, and see nothing wrong with this.

[Mekh]

It's their platform but modern society depends on them for communication.

Oh no, what would we ever do without Twitter. The whole cottage industry of selling "articles", that are just a dozen hand-picked reaction tweets, would collapse!

[Mihalik]

Who are these Europeans you speak of? I'm from Europe, and see nothing wrong with this.

It's those Europeans destroying Western civilization in the imagination of "Western Chauvinists".

[Egomaniac]

Why don't you go after them from law angle then?

The people that broke laws are getting dealt with by the Authorities

The companies that broke ToS are getting dealt with by the comapnies with whom they broke ToS with.

Why do you have to pressure infrastructure companies to act instead, thus "deputizing" them to enforce it?

No one is getting "deputized".

You also realize that laws are not universal? That there are different countries with different approaches?

When you operate within a country...you agree to operate according to their laws.

- - - Updated - - -

Enforcing American sensibilities upon the world isn't going to be cheered.

Yes, those terrible American sensiblities of disliking Nazis and Child Pornographers.

[Shalcker]

The people that broke laws are getting dealt with by the Authorities

The companies that broke ToS are getting dealt with by the comapnies with whom they broke ToS with.

Look at message to which i was responding and try again.

PornHub broke no ToS with Visa as their conduct being unlawful have never been proven in a court of law.

When you operate within a country...you agree to operate according to their laws.

Which they did the entire time.

[Cthulhu 2020]

It is corporate censorship.

There are laws regarding all that; laws by which PornHub abides (in multiple countries too), or it would be unable to operate at all.

And yet Pornhub wasn't enforcing it effectively enough. One of the big issues wasn't directly "Child" pornography but moreso just underage pornography, where the girl would be a "teen" *wink wink nudge nudge* who was implied to be a teen of 18+ but was later found to be under 18. But we'll address why the credit card companies pressuring pornhub in the first place wasn't such a bad thing after...

Why don't you go after them from law angle then?

They often do. Thing is, companies often proactively remove employees/users from their space for breaking laws preemptively. Why? Because if a company continues to allow a known law breaker to continue to exist under the employ or service, the company themselves can face charges as there are also laws against companies allowing lawbreakers to use their services. Man, that argument sure was easy to pop, like basically all of your arguments are.

Why do you have to pressure infrastructure companies to act instead, thus "deputizing" them to enforce it?

I was not aware porn sites and social media were infrastructure. Infrastructure is roads, power, sewer, water, and internet among other things. Access to internet may be considered infrastructure, but access to social media is definitively not. And access to the internet as a whole is not being barred to anyone anywhere in these arguments. Stop trying to incorrectly mix vocabulary because you know it would muddy the conversation

You also realize that laws are not universal? That there are different countries with different approaches?

Enforcing American sensibilities upon the world isn't going to be cheered.

Gee I wonder why American based companies should be supporting American laws? I realize sedition against the American government is a Russian past-time, but Twitter and Facebook are American based companies. If you wanna spread division, unrest, violence, sedition, and insurrection in America, feel free to do it on whatever Russia social media exists. I'm sure it's encouraged. Though, should you really be making this particular complaint, considering what would happen to you if you began plotting insurrections in Russia on Russian social media? Being banned from a social media platform would be the least of your worries.

[Egomaniac]

Look at message to which i was responding and try again.

PornHub broke no ToS with Visa as their conduct being unlawful have never been proven in a court of law.

Which they did the entire time.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...on-child-abuse

Pornhub has removed millions of videos – the majority of its content – after an investigation revealed a large number of them featured underaged and sex-trafficked subjects.

[Felya]

PornHub broke no ToS with Visa as their conduct being unlawful have never been proven in a court of law.

You should have been their lawyer and fought the investigation results, instead of complying with the investigation and removing the illegal content voluntarily. Can you guess why PornHub didn’t listen to your advise, to instead avoid litigation involving their ability to show under age and sex trafficking victims?