Devin Nunes leaving Congress

[AlexanderG]

At this point, anyone stupid enough to invest in a Trump business deserves to lose their money. Trump's name primarily attracts grifters, liars, and Dunning-Kruger types, now more than ever. I can't imagine this business doing well for long, if at all.

I've never seen someone able to force a new social media platform to become popular. It happens organically and virally, regardless of advertising or hype. Also, it seems like the Trump demographic is heavily skewed towards older people who don't use social media very much. I don't see how this company could be viable, but it will be interesting (and predictable) to see where of all that investment money actually goes. That will be the thing to watch.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Would you, if having the power and capability, censer him or forbid him from using social media platforms?

If it was up to me, he would be in jail...

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Would you, if having the power and capability, censer him or forbid him from using social media platforms?

Would you make him above following the rules he agreed to abide by in order to obtain the privilege to use a platform provided by a private company?

 

[F1fan]

He still deserves a voice. A place to openly vent. At least in a free country.

He's not in prison, and has access to reporters. His access to private social media has been cut off due to misuse of those platforms. He isn't owed access to those private companies.

 

[Kooky]

I can't imagine this business doing well for long, if at all.

One could have said the same thing about WeWork, but that and several other startup scandals revealed just how little of even a basic amount of research many investors actually do when a company comes recommended by their one percenter peers. I can see a lot of investors getting suckered into this simply by being promised a massive potential market among the MAGA crowd.

Would you, if having the power and capability, censer him or forbid him from using social media platforms?

On RF, people have the choice to either abide by the rules laid out and enforced by staff, or cease posting here.
Would you consider that a form of censorship?

Trump's Twitter ban was exactly the same thing, only on a much larger platform.

 

[Twilight Hue]

One could have said the same thing about WeWork, but that and several other startup scandals revealed just how little of even a basic amount of research many investors actually do when a company comes recommended by their one percenter peers. I can see a lot of investors getting suckered into this simply by being promised a massive potential market among the MAGA crowd.



On RF, people have the choice to either abide by the rules laid out and enforced by staff, or cease posting here.
Would you consider that a form of censorship?

Trump's Twitter ban was exactly the same thing, only on a much larger platform.

It certainly is censorship on part of the site.

Any free expression of opinion and statement that is made forbidden and non accessible, is censorship.


Now granted, in spirit of common sense and even good taste, one would probably not want rampant preaching, or calls to violence, or a terror cell making its home in a forum, so I can see how such things can be limited by design.

I find subsections and dirs to help keep things open and fair to a degree, but it's still censorship in the raw.

I think on how bad censorship goes , depends on the severity and scope on part of the person or persons who decide what gets exposure and what dosent by individuals and the subsequent measures to remove such things.

 

[Kooky]

It certainly is censorship on part of the site.

Then frankly, you're under a misconception of what censorship and freedom of speech actually entail.

Freedom of speech means that the government is not allowed to censor your speech, but it also means that you are not entitled to a platform. If you cannot find a space where to air your grievances, then nobody is obliged to provide one.

Keep in mind that this is what I call the liberal-capitalist conception of free speech: It is designed to allow the running of press (or in modern parlance, media) in order to faciliate a healthy media economy that allows the owners of media maximal freedom to publish what they want, while giving the government minimal control.

It is not designed to allow for every person to air their grievances wherever they want and in any way they want and have those grievances be heard by their peers wherever they would like to be heard. It is certainly not designed to allow for a form of public discourse divorced from a need to trade, produce, circulate, buy and sell media content for the sake of profitability.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Then frankly, you're under a misconception of what censorship and freedom of speech actually entail.

Freedom of speech means that the government is not allowed to censor your speech, but it also means that you are not entitled to a platform. If you cannot find a space where to air your grievances, then nobody is obliged to provide one.

Keep in mind that this is what I call the liberal-capitalist conception of free speech: It is designed to allow the running of press (or in modern parlance, media) in order to faciliate a healthy media economy that allows the owners of media maximal freedom to publish what they want, while giving the government minimal control.

It is not designed to allow for every person to air their grievances wherever they want and in any way they want and have those grievances be heard by their peers wherever they would like to be heard. It is certainly not designed to allow for a form of public discourse divorced from a need to trade, produce, circulate, buy and sell media content for the sake of profitability.

Sounds like censorship to me.

 

[F1fan]

Sounds like censorship to me.

Which private companies will apply to maintain the standards of their platforms. It's legal, and to mind their right. They don't owe anything to vile and unethical people, like trump. "We reserve the right....."

Do you disagree with this censorship? If not, then do you think the government should force private companies to allow vile and unethical users?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Which private companies will apply to maintain the standards of their platforms. It's legal, and to mind their right. They don't owe anything to vile and unethical people, like trump. "We reserve the right....."

Do you disagree with this censorship? If not, then do you think the government should force private companies to allow vile and unethical users?

I disagree with censorship in all forms with rare exceptions involving clearly illegal and harmful activities. Torture , human trafficking, drug dealing as a conduit for base operations, etc. Dark net stuff.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Would you make him above following the rules he agreed to abide by in order to obtain the privilege to use a platform provided by a private company?

It will in kind, be very interesting to see how Trumps site will be approached by his opponents, once its up and running in regards to the same rule making that is being defended now for present platforms.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Which private companies will apply to maintain the standards of their platforms. It's legal, and to mind their right. They don't owe anything to vile and unethical people, like trump. "We reserve the right....."

Do you disagree with this censorship? If not, then do you think the government should force private companies to allow vile and unethical users?

I actually do. Same as other media, there should be equal unhindered access for opposition with some common sense exceptions of course made in terms of nefarious structuring associated with real harmful real world activity, such as drug dealing, human trafficking, ordering killings etc.

 

[Kooky]

Sounds like censorship to me.

Yes, you not owning your own Facebook sized online content platform is literally censorship.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Yes, you not owning your own Facebook sized online content platform is literally censorship.

I hate Facebook.

 

[Kooky]

I hate Facebook.

I like turtles.

 

[F1fan]

I disagree with censorship in all forms with rare exceptions involving clearly illegal and harmful activities. Torture , human trafficking, drug dealing as a conduit for base operations, etc. Dark net stuff.

What you prefer is irrelevant to the business decisions private social media companies make. Parler tried your approach and it did not go well. Even they could not make that vile of a community work without more stringent rules.

 

[F1fan]

It will in kind, be very interesting to see how Trumps site will be approached by his opponents, once its up and running in regards to the same rule making that is being defended now for present platforms.

And it will be interesting to see how trump would deal with those who are not fans of his saying their piece on his platform. My suspicion is he will silence anyone who says negative things about him, especially the many true things about his corruption. A deceitful person like trump doesn't want freedom, he wants control.

 

[Kooky]

I disagree with censorship in all forms with rare exceptions involving clearly illegal and harmful activities.

Why are you on this site when you are fundamentally opposed to how it is being run?

Shouldn't you be at a place that's closer to your ideal, like 8chan?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Shouldn't you be at a place that's closer to your ideal, like 8chan?

Sounds like your well acquainted with that site.

What's 8chan?

 

[Kooky]

Sounds like your well acquainted with that site.

Not really. I'm just name dropping for comedic effect.

What's 8chan?

I'd say "google is your friend", but I believe they've been de-listed from Google searches for some time, so I don't know if you would even find that site at this point. Here's a summary from Wikipedia:

8chan - Wikipedia