Biden or Trump

Biden or Trump


  • Total voters
    57
  • Poll closed .

bottomups

Bad Moon Risen'
"Trump is the vehicle we ride.
Ride him hard and heavy, He's equipped for the task."

Even the slug's for salt can't not see the hilarity in this comment.
1602975484668.png

Get in line. Putins Uber.
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
O MAN , I just got back from a MASSIVE Trump parade in Pennsylvania , I've never in my life have ever seen anything like it . Bikers , bus's , military vehicles , tractor trailers , dump trucks and cars for miles . Absolutely unbelievable !!!!
unbelievable stupidity america will vote for either of these crooks
 

zimbomb

Well-Known Member
What differentiates them from a public utility that is regulated?
one is essential. One holds a necessary monopoly. You have choice and options. You don't seem like the type to push for more government involvement in our lives. They own a soap box among many soap boxes. The owner should be allowed to regulate itself. The owner should also have reasonable immunity from what someone says on their soapbox. These protections are essential to these businesses. They drives innovation and competition. As a consumer you have choice and power. You can boycott/bypass facebook, but can't really bypass the water company.

I do think internet service should at the very least be considered a common carrier, but the current FCC allows ISP's way to much freedom. You may not like Twitter's moderation, but as it stands your very access to twitter is at risk.

The internet is now essential to the education of our children and the lively hood of countless people. Consumer protections and higher regulations in the industry (ISP's, not internet businesses) is going to be needed for America and Americans to be leaders in the digital world.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
one is essential. One holds a necessary monopoly. You have choice and options. You don't seem like the type to push for more government involvement in our lives. They own a soap box among many soap boxes. The owner should be allowed to regulate itself. The owner should also have reasonable immunity from what someone says on their soapbox. These protections are essential to these businesses. They drives innovation and competition. As a consumer you have choice and power. You can boycott/bypass facebook, but can't really bypass the water company.

I do think internet service should at the very least be considered a common carrier, but the current FCC allows ISP's way to much freedom. You may not like Twitter's moderation, but as it stands your very access to twitter is at risk.

The internet is now essential to the education of our children and the lively hood of countless people. Consumer protections and higher regulations in the industry (ISP's, not internet businesses) is going to be needed for America and Americans to be leaders in the digital world.
Newspapers are old technology. Social media is new technology. There are long established rules for newspapers to protect the public from their power. When a newspaper goes after a private citizen(this also pertains to tv news networks)they must be very careful to be exact and truthful or they can face serious litigation. The new technology, social media platforms, have been given protections as a platform. However when the owners of that platform take sides, and their side goes after private citizens in ways that can harm that citizen, such as doxing, the owners are definitely risking the government establishing oversight, and taking away protections that keep them from being sued. "Cancel culture", if not reined in, will eventually lead to the government stepping in.
 

zimbomb

Well-Known Member
Newspapers are old technology. Social media is new technology. There are long established rules for newspapers to protect the public from their power. When a newspaper goes after a private citizen(this also pertains to tv news networks)they must be very careful to be exact and truthful or they can face serious litigation. The new technology, social media platforms, have been given protections as a platform. However when the owners of that platform take sides, and their side goes after private citizens in ways that can harm that citizen, such as doxing, the owners are definitely risking the government establishing oversight, and taking away protections that keep them from being sued. "Cancel culture", if not reined in, will eventually lead to the government stepping in.
The news paper has rules. This is america you do not put rules on the news stand. You have consumer choice where to shop. The owner of the news stand has choice in what to stock and immunity within reason to the inventory. Also reasonable immunity to possibly bias censorship (taking a sharpie to a playboy).

This is about freedom and private ownership, something I enjoy.
 
Last edited:

vantexan

Well-Known Member
The news paper has rules. This is america you do not put rules on the news stand. You have consumer choice where to shop. The owner of the news stand has choice in what to stock and immunity within reason to the inventory. Also reasonable immunity to possibly bias censorship (taking a sharpie to a playboy).

This is about freedom and private ownership, something I enjoy.
When the owner of the news stand decides to take that sharpie to a playboy then playboy has the right to remove their magazine from his new stand. Actions have consequences and when those actions hurt private citizens the government has an obligation to play referee. Stock exchanges are platforms too but when operators of those exchanges act on inside information they break the law. Same thing with social media platforms. As long as it is a platform the owner of the platform is protected from litigation that newspapers aren't. Cross the line and participate in behavior that harms others then the platform owners risk losing their protection. I don't know why you can't see that. I guess as long as the platforms back your point of view you're fine with it. Wonder how you'll feel when they decide you must be deleted from public discourse and go after you in every way possible including showing up at your home or trying to get you fired?
 

Old Man Jingles

Rat out of a cage
one is essential. One holds a necessary monopoly. You have choice and options. You don't seem like the type to push for more government involvement in our lives. They own a soap box among many soap boxes. The owner should be allowed to regulate itself. The owner should also have reasonable immunity from what someone says on their soapbox. These protections are essential to these businesses. They drives innovation and competition. As a consumer you have choice and power. You can boycott/bypass facebook, but can't really bypass the water company.

I do think internet service should at the very least be considered a common carrier, but the current FCC allows ISP's way to much freedom. You may not like Twitter's moderation, but as it stands your very access to twitter is at risk.

The internet is now essential to the education of our children and the lively hood of countless people. Consumer protections and higher regulations in the industry (ISP's, not internet businesses) is going to be needed for America and Americans to be leaders in the digital world.
Internet is a public utility as you imply.
Twitter is a content platform which uses the internet.
The consideration at this point is whether Twitter is/has becoming a public utility as well.
Many ISP’s are owned by public utilities at this point.
 

zimbomb

Well-Known Member
When the owner of the news stand decides to take that sharpie to a playboy then playboy has the right to remove their magazine from his new stand.
Yes exactly. They get to choose who gets to sell their content.

What you want is the government to force the news stand to carry playboy and ban censorship by a privately owned news stand.

This is not american. A single social media platform is not essential to anyone. You have the freedom to not use one and the freedom to use another. I fully support a right wing twitter or a hippie dippie safe space platform.

Freedom the american way...
 

zimbomb

Well-Known Member
Internet is a public utility as you imply.
Twitter is a content platform which uses the internet.
The consideration at this point is whether Twitter is/has becoming a public utility as well.
Many ISP’s are owned by public utilities at this point.
I said common carrier there's a big difference. Twitter is nothing more than a soap box. Privately owned and operated soapbox. Big brother should only have minimum control of our soapbox's. Don't like the soapbox they're other soapbox's or build your own. Free market, rugged individualism and boot strapping america.

Here's the difference. If twitter blocked/censored joe biden or cnn I'd be upset. I would not call for the government to get involved. I'd support another platform or protest twitter to change.
 
Last edited:
Top