Groups representing Google, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon sue Florida

#77
#77
RockyTop85 said:
It wasn’t a yes or no question.

What statements have you tried to post, and before it went live, you got an email from Freak saying “you’re prohibited from posting here?”
Click to expand...
None
You?

freak has a consistent set of rules that everyone agrees too before joining. Those rules don’t change after the fact and they apply equally to everyone.
That’s the difference between VN and Twitter ect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#78
#78
Orangeslice13 said:
None
You?

freak has a consistent set of rules that everyone agrees too before joining. Those rules don’t change after the fact and they apply equally to everyone.
That’s the difference between VN and Twitter ect.
Click to expand...
Never happened. Because they’re not publishing the forum, they are a platform that hosts the forum.

Yet, if you go to VolNation.com you can see that they in fact publish content There are articles published by VolNation.com. So VolNation.com is both a publisher of some content and a platform host of your content over which they exercise absolutely no editorial discretion before you publish it on their site. (There are none there now, but they have been there in the past.)

Just like Facebook in the court case.

So how is it “just stupid” to say that VolNation shouldn’t be liable for the things forum users say about each other?
 
Last edited:
#80
#80
RockyTop85 said:
Never happened. Because they’re not publishing the forum, they are a platform that hosts the forum.

Yet, if you go to VolNation.com you can see that they in fact publish content. There are articles published by VolNation.com. So VolNation.com is both a publisher of some content and a platform host of your content over which they exercise absolutely no editorial discretion before you publish it on their site.

Just like Facebook in the court case.

So how is it “just stupid” to say that VolNation shouldn’t be liable for the things forum users say about each other?
Click to expand...

They should be and ultimately would be liable for things we say about each other if they didn’t maintain the standard that was agreed too when we signed up.
That’s why there are rules that are enforced.
Also why there are plenty of banned posters who are no longer allowed here.

Now apply that standard to Twitter and Facebook. They are over the line and It’s just a matter of time before it all comes around to bite them in the ass. You can’t treat people unequal on that level and get away with it forever. And they know. That’s why they’re building up funds for the payout.
 
Last edited:
#83
#83
Orangeslice13 said:
They should be and ultimately would be liable for things we say about each other if they didn’t maintain the standard that was agreed too when we signed up.
That’s why there are rules that are enforced.
Also why there are plenty of banned posters who are no longer allowed here.

Now apply that standard to Twitter and Facebook. They are over the line and It’s just a matter of time before it all comes around to bite them in the ass. You can’t treat people unequal on that level and get away with it forever. And they know. That’s why they’re building up funds for the payout.
Click to expand...
A. They’re not enforced consistently, which
B. Makes this place exactly like Facebook and Twitter.

You admit you don’t use any other social media, and everything you’ve said to describe VolNation applies to Twitter and Facebook. You just don’t know it.
 
#84
#84
RockyTop85 said:
A. They’re not enforced consistently, which
B. Makes this place exactly like Facebook and Twitter.

You admit you don’t use any other social media, and everything you’ve said to describe VolNation applies to Twitter and Facebook. You just don’t know it.
Click to expand...

A. They are.
B. They’re not.
C. Because I don’t now doesn’t mean I have not in the past. To believe I don’t know based on what Little you know of me assumes facts not yet represented.
D. If you’re a lawyer, you’re not a smart one.
 
#85
#85
I use Facebook and Twitter despite having known from Day 1 that my account can be deleted at any time for any reason. Is the question that all social media sites should be held to the fire when they enact their ToS?

I actually prefer to call them TaCoS because tacos are delicious, but I digress.
 
#86
#86
Orangeslice13 said:
A. They are.
B. They’re not.
C. Because I don’t now doesn’t mean I have not in the past. To believe I don’t know based on what Little you know of me assumes facts not yet represented.
D. If you’re a lawyer, you’re not a smart one.
Click to expand...
Isn’t name calling one of the rules? Let’s see how long this stays up.
 
#89
#89
Orangeslice13 said:
What name calling exactly?
Click to expand...
Sorry, the rule says no “personal attacks.” Even better. I’m sure a mod will be along shortly to remove it.

I think I’ve had two posts removed in almost 3 years posting in the PF, I’m sure that’s because I’ve never personally attacked anyone.
 
#90
#90
McDad said:
I know, right? lawyer is a disparaging term. Slice is over the line.
Click to expand...
Again ....what name calling?
“If he’s a lawyer, he’s not very smart “.
Is that name calling or is that pointing out that a bad lawyer would not do what he just did?
That’s not name calling....that’s presenting facts
 
#91
#91
RockyTop85 said:
Isn’t name calling one of the rules? Let’s see how long this stays up.
Click to expand...

This subforum is the Wild West. Some posters choose to be decent, some choose to allow their emotions full reign. The mods do a pretty good job of taking care of the blatant ****-spraying in here when it happens but most things are given a wide berth.
 
#92
#92
Tyler Durden said:
Are you asking me to explain the difference between an elected official selectively limiting dialogue because some people say mean things about him vs a business no longer allowing people to use their products because those people have broken the rules of the business, usually outlined in what's commonly known as "Terms and Conditions" (to which said user agrees to before being permitted to use the product)?
Click to expand...

The original argument was that the public cannot be denied access to conversations of a public official. So wouldn't it make sense that if the public official can't block anyone from having access to that conversation that the service provider cannot block access of anyone from that public official? Seems like the original defense was that there needed to be an open and unfiltered conduit between the people and public officials... or more specifically (based on them using the 1st Amendment as the foundation of their argument), an unfiltered conduit between one individual and another.
 
#94
#94
AshG said:
This subforum is the Wild West. Some posters choose to be decent, some choose to allow their emotions full reign. The mods do a pretty good job of taking care of the blatant ****-spraying in here when it happens but most things are given a wide berth.
Click to expand...
Do you think all personal attacks are removed?
 
#96
#96
However the attempt to distract from the ass kicking he’s currently receiving is interesting.
 
#98
#98
n_huffhines said:
I'm not sure but this doesn't sound like a very libertarian justification. Libertarianism aside, this example isn't a relevant comparison. What you say on your phone about transgender people to the person on the other end has no effect on MCI, other MCI users, or the general public. The specifics of what people say publicly on Twitter is the entire point of the platform...and it makes perfect sense for them to try to ensure their platform reflects their core values.
Click to expand...
Conference call or party line?
 
  • Like
Reactions: n_huffhines and Orangeslice13
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top