This was a good prediction.

No one said it was illegal, otherwise we’d have to elect politicians daily

It doesn’t mean a internet site has to be given a platform

That it was...

Anyway, maybe I am missing something here. If you aren’t wearing a shirt or are acting rudely, a restaurant can refuse to serve you. Why can’t a website that is free to access and use refuse to serve you if they don’t like your behavior?

Freedom of speech means you can say what you want without it being illegal, but certain private institutions don’t have to stand for it.

I mean if I’m running a restaurant and you’re being an asshole, you’re out. If I’m running a social media website and you’re being an asshole, you’re out.

Try being a mod in this place

"try having twins"

Also nobody is being forced to use facebook, twitter, etc. You could watch the CBS nightly news. It’s every person’s choice.

Honestly RM doesn’t need mods unless someone is sharing PM’s

Otherwise you know what you’re in for if you choose to post here

The debate hinges on the fact that many see the best parallel to Facebook, Twitter, etc. not as a private restaurant but as something more like the mail.

Oh and merging threads. We need someone who can merge threads.

PS - The Dixie Chicks

Imagine the restaurant was half the size of the US.

Or imagine that the restaurant owner called the other 6 restaurant owners and they colluded to ban you from all of them permanently.

Or imagine that you decided to create your own restaurant, but the banks refuse to grant you a loan, or one of the 3 real estate companies in the country refused to sell you the real estate or even rent it to you.



Freedom of speech isn't a law. It's not something granted by the government. It's a fundamental tenet of liberal political theory, the social contract and an American cultural value (and if you can't tell, it's certainly one of mine). The fact that it's expressly mentioned in the first amendment is besides the point really. And there are more forms of censorship than state censorship.

Saying that it is a violation of the value of free speech isn't saying that it's a violation of the law. Of course it isn't illegal. Corporations have every legal right to do whatever they want with their product. That hardly means that its morally neutral or that it's not harmful.

So start your own web hosting service and social media platform

You mean like Parler?

I don’t how it all works but if there is a concentrated group of fucking psychos lathering each other up about batshit crazy conspiracy theories and planning violent mob attacks, maybe someone should ... step in.

Look man we got the other end of it here in Seattle with the CHOP shit.

Everyone has gone fucking crazy.

If I’m running a social media site and I am concerned about user behavior, I don’t have to allow it. They can find another way to talk to each other. The service I am providing is completely 100% optional.

Weird that there was no coordinated unplatforming of those behind CHOP. Those with charges equivalent to the Capitol Hill scrum will be getting court dates in... 2022? If the charges aren't dropped, of course. Anarchy for me but not thee.

maybe invading the US capitol during presidential election certification is slightly more severe than raiding a jamba juice

Murking a couple teenagers is pretty severe.

Those accounts should be cancelled, too.

what is this some kind of ikea metaphor

FWIW a temporary ban version of this happens more than you would guess on a Saturday night in the bar district of Anytown, USA.