Facebook: Troll Farms Reaching 140 Million Americans a Month

[Fugus]

I didn't know you could use the messenger app without Facebook

You still need an account and all but you don’t see the profiles, feeds and all. It’s just the messenger on it. So either they contact you or you contact them. No advertisements or people tagging you on stuff, you just won’t see that stuff.

If it wasn’t for a few people who live a while away likely wouldn’t have it. And it’s good to contact people who can’t seem to keep a single phone number for long.

[Yadryonych]

Then, why did you speak up? This is a long-winded way of saying you agree with what I said, after long disagreeing with it.

Because it seems that you are arguing for no responsibility whatsoever, which I disagree with

[Machismo]

Because it seems that you are arguing for no responsibility whatsoever, which I disagree with

Well, I guess you have learned your mistake, and glad to know you retracted. This all could have been avoided, if you had actually followed along.

[Orange Joe]

Yep perfectly well said. If social media was held to the same standards as everything else. This nonsense would end overnight.

So I should be able to come to your yard. Spew some shit, and leave you responsible?

- - - Updated - - -

You know that's how it works with child porn/ terrorism/ other illegal content, right?

illegal content.... lie and such aren't illegal.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm pretty sure they mean the platform should be responsible for curtailing such activity, but not for the activity itself

I'm willing to bet I could dig in your history and find post from you bitching about MMO champ mods doing exactly this.

[Orange Joe]

If I let you come to my yard and spew shit without ever attempting to stop you? Sure. I should be held responsible for allowing that to continue.

Glad you don't run things. Me personally I think people should be held responsible for their own actions. Not someone elses.

[Machismo]

Glad you don't run things. Me personally I think people should be held responsible for their own actions. Not someone elses.

The funny thing is, we know what happens...

We saw the lawsuits. We know that the internet would come to a fucking standstill, because no company would want to be legally liable for that shit. I could literally make burner accounts on here, make libelous accusations against myself, and sue them for damages.

[Yadryonych]

illegal content.... lie and such aren't illegal.

Awesome! Looks like the case is closed then.

I'm willing to bet I could dig in your history and find post from you bitching about MMO champ mods doing exactly this.

Sure, you are most welcome to unearth the incriminaring evidence of me complaining about mods removing illegal stuff

[Machismo]

Awesome! Looks like the case is closed then.



Sure, you are most welcome to unearth the incriminaring evidence of me complaining about mods removing illegal stuff

We're well aware of your stance on fake news, misinformation, and lies.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...ian-Federation

[Yadryonych]

The funny thing is, we know what happens...

We saw the lawsuits. We know that the internet would come to a fucking standstill, because no company would want to be legally liable for that shit. I could literally make burner accounts on here, make libelous accusations against myself, and sue them for damages.

That's not exactly how it works. First, the court will have to rule that the accusations are libelous and demand the platform to remove these (which is actually a common practice). Then the site will have to not comply. It is only then they could be sued for not complying with court's order.

- - - Updated - - -

We're well aware of your stance on fake news, misinformation, and lies.

And which of that would be illegal, exactly?

[Endus]

That's not exactly how it works. First, the court will have to rule that the accusations are libelous and demand the platform to remove these (which is actually a common practice). Then the site will have to not comply. It is only then they could be sued for not complying with court's order.

That's flatly not the case.

In that case, the media company would be guilty of contempt of court, for defying the court order, which is a completely separate issue from the civil infraction of libel.

The court ruling that the accusations are libellous is literally the outcome of the first lawsuit against the company, where they were found to be responsible.

[Machismo]

That's not exactly how it works. First, the court will have to rule that the accusations are libelous and demand the platform to remove these (which actually a common practice). Then the site will have to not comply. It is only then they could be sued for not complying with court's order.

Once again, this means you haven't been following along with the conversation you are even in.

We already know, because such things already happened. Such lawsuits already happened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratt...gy_Services_Co.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubby,...CompuServe_Inc.

You are now arguing against historical record in your attempt to push misinformation. Now, if you have court cases from your own nation, that refute this, then I look forward to seeing them. Otherwise, we will be left with those court cases, and evidence that you are definitively wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not exactly how it works. First, the court will have to rule that the accusations are libelous and demand the platform to remove these (which is actually a common practice). Then the site will have to not comply. It is only then they could be sued for not complying with court's order.

- - - Updated - - -



And which of that would be illegal, exactly?

Oh, I'm well aware you are free to push lies, fake news, and misinformation. I never said it was illegal, merely that is what you are doing.

The evidence was provided.

[Orange Joe]

That's not exactly how it works. First, the court will have to rule that the accusations are libelous and demand the platform to remove these (which is actually a common practice). Then the site will have to not comply. It is only then they could be sued for not complying with court's order.

So why not just go after the person who posted it in the first place. Why bother with a middleman? With your way the person is free to post it again either on their site or another site with no repercussions since the courts go after the company.

[Yadryonych]

So why not just go after the person who posted it in the first place. Why bother with a middleman? With your way the person is free to post it again either on their site or another site with no repercussions since the courts go after the company.

Either you read it wrong or I wasnt clear enough. The person who posted it will have to be sued in the first place and the court will have to rule not in his favour. And when he posts it again anywhere he would be sued as well. The media's job is only to remove and/or denounce his accusations AFTER the court's rule

[Easo]

Nothing surprising to me. You are way too vulnerable to this shit. And no finger waving only towards conservatives, let's be fair and realistic...

[Orange Joe]

Either you read it wrong or I wasnt crear enough. The person who posted it will have to be sued in the first place and the court will have to rule not in his favour. And when he posts it again anywhere he would be sued as well. The media's job is only to remove and/or denounce his accusations AFTER the court's rule

No I didn't read it wrong. Maybe you typed it wrong because you're taking about the "platform" being in court for the court to demand removing.



The court shouldn't have to talk to the platform, They should demand the person remove the content or face consequences.

[Doctor Amadeus]

No it wouldn't, it would be labeled as "opinion" or as a rumor from "anonymous source" like they do in other media

Yeah but it had damn well be an opinion as an example I think anyone in a position of authority who says something to the effect you should take something and people are killed, yes you should be criminally and civilly liable.

[Machismo]

Either you read it wrong or I wasnt clear enough. The person who posted it will have to be sued in the first place and the court will have to rule not in his favour. And when he posts it again anywhere he would be sued as well. The media's job is only to remove and/or denounce his accusations AFTER the court's rule

That isn't what is being discussed.

[Doctor Amadeus]

So I should be able to come to your yard. Spew some shit, and leave you responsible?

Yes guilt by association absolutely, if you entertained some dumb fuck that says something you KNOW to cause harm and you do zip to reasonably when capable to stop it, then yes you deserve to be treated accordingly

[Orange Joe]

Yes guilt by association absolutely, if you entertained some dumb fuck that says something you KNOW to cause harm and you do zip to stop it, then yes you deserve to be treated accordingly

How you gonna stop me? Assault me?

[Machismo]

Yeah but it had damn well be an opinion as an example I think anyone in a position of authority who says something to the effect you should take something and people are killed, yes you should be criminally and civilly liable.

You've made it clear that you should be criminally and civilly liable for what I do and say on your property.